202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 1

 UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY 

 ENERGY EFFICIENCY AND RENEWABLE ENERGY 

 ENERGY CONSERVATION PROGRAM 

 PRELIMINARY ANALYSIS OF ENERGY CONSERVATION 

 STANDARDS FOR WALK-IN COOLERS AND 

 WALK-IN FREEZERS 

 PUBLIC MEETING 

 WEDNESDAY 

 MAY 19, 2010 

 The Public Meeting convened in 

Room 8E-089 in the Forrestal Building, 1000 

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

at 9:00 a.m., Douglas Brookman, Facilitator, 

presiding, 

PRESENT 

DOUGLAS BROOKMAN, Facilitator 

KARIM AMRANE, Ph.D., AHRI 

ERIC S. ANDERSON, Pacific Northwest National 

 Laboratory 

TIM BALLO, Earthjustice 

GOPAL BANDYOPADHYAY, Ph.D., Pacific Northwest 

 National Laboratory 

WARREN L. BEETON, Emerson Climate Technologies 

MICHELLE BRITT, Pacific Northwest National 

 Laboratory 

JOHN CYMBALSKY, DOE 

DARYL ERBS, Manitowoc Foodservice 

ERIC H. FITZ, Navigant Consulting 

CLAIRE GAGNE, Navigant Consulting 

CONSUELO GUZMAN-LEONG, Pacific Northwest 

 National Laboratory 

DAVE HARTMAN, HTP Group 

MICHAEL KIDO, DOE 

MILEN KIRILOV, Carpenter Co. 

ELIZABETH KOHL, DOE 

STEVE KOUSKI, Carpenter Co. 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 2

PRESENT: (continued) 

MICHAEL J. KRUPA, BASF 

REBECCA LEGETT, Navigant Consulting 

HARMON S. LEWIS, American Panel 

DAN MANOLE, Ingersoll Rand 

ARISTOTLE MARANTAN, Ph.D., Navigant Consulting 

JOANNA MAUER, Appliance Standards Awareness 

 Project 

GAVIN McCORMICK, Pacific Northwest National 

 Laboratory 

JON McHUGH, McHugh Energy Consultants 

FRED L. MINELLI, Kysor Panel Systems 

BRETT A. MITCHELL, Kason Industries, Inc. 

KENNY OWEN, Master-Bilt 

RONALD E. PARK, Bayer MaterialScience LLC 

GRAHAM B. PARKER, Pacific Northwest National 

 Laboratory 

MICHAEL PERRODIN, Hill Phoenix 

JIM PERRY, Thermal Rite 

LOREN RASMUSSON, Nor-Lake 

DEVIN RAUSS, Southern California Edison 

R. DOUGLAS ROBERTS, ThermoCor 

CHARLIE STEPHENS, Adjuvant Consulting 

MICHAEL STRAUB, Heatcraft Refrigeration 

 Products LLC 

PETER STRINI, Tafco 

JAKE VANDEVORT, American Chemistry Council 

COLLIN WEBER, Navigant Consulting 

SARAH WIDDER, Pacific Northwest National 

 Laboratory 

DAVID WINIARSKI, Pacific Northwest National 

 Laboratory 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 3

 TABLE OF CONTENTS 

Welcome, Introductions, Agenda Review, and 

 Opening Statements...................4 

Rulemaking Overview.......................30 

Market and Technology Assessment, Screening 

 Analysis, and Engineering Analysis..64 

Markup Analysis and Energy Use Analysis..138 

Shipments Analysis, Life-Cycle Cost and 

 Payback Period Analysis, and National 

 Impact Analysis....................193 

Manufacturer Impact Analysis (MIA).......308 

Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NOPR) 

 Analyses: Utility Impact Analysis, 

 Employment Impact Analysis, 

 Environmental Assessment, and 

 Regulatory Impact Analysis.........364 

Test Procedures..........................364 

Next Steps and Closing Remarks...........382 

Adjourn 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 4

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

2 9:02 A.M. 

3 MR. BROOKMAN: Good morning, 

4 everyone, and welcome. My name is Doug 

5 Brookman from Public Solutions in Baltimore. 

6 I'm glad to see you. This is the U.S. 

7 Department of Energy's Public Meeting on 

8 Energy Conservation Standards for Walk-in 

9 Coolers and Walk-in Freezers. Today is 

10 Wednesday, May 19, 2010. 

11 Charles Llenza wanted to make 

12 welcome remarks. 

13 MR. LLENZA: Welcome to the 

14 Department of Energy and on behalf of the 

15 Building Technology Program, the Appliance 

16 Standards Group, I welcome you to the Pre17 Analysis Public Meeting for Walk-in Coolers 

18 and Walk-in Freezers. I encourage today for 

19 your discussions, your comments and additional 

20 information that you may provide the 

21 Department as we go through this process. And 

22 I welcome you back since we were here a couple 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 5

1 of months ago. 

2 I see a lot of familiar faces across the room 

3 here, so welcome to the meeting. 

4 MR. BROOKMAN: Thank you. It's 

5 our tradition to do introductions right off 

6 the start, so we'll start with that. If 

7 you'll say your name and organization or 

8 affiliation. You may wish to find another 

9 chair, so you can see the screen. 

10 Your name and organization, 

11 please? 

12 MR. PERRODIN: Mike Perrodin, Hill 

13 Phoenix Walk-Ins. 

14 MR. McHUGH: Jon McHugh, McHugh 

15 Energy on behalf of Southern California 

16 Edison. 

17 MR. MINELLI: Fred Minelli, Kysor 

18 Panel Systems. 

19 MR. RASMUSSON: Loren Rasmusson of 

20 Nor-Lake. 

21 MR. ERBS: Daryl Erbs from 

22 Manitowoc Foodservice. 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 6

1 MR. LEWIS: Harmon Lewis, American 

2 Panel. 

3 MR. PARK: Ron Park, Bayer. 

4 MR. ROBERTS: Doug Roberts, 

5 Thermocore. 

6 MR. MANOLE: Dan Manole, Hussmann 

7 Ingersoll-Rand. 

8 MR. PERRY: Jim Perry, Crown Tonka 

9 Walk-ins. 

10 MR. KIRILOV: Milen Kirilov, 

11 Carpenter Company. 

12 MR. KRUPA: Mike Krupa from BASF. 

13 DR. AMRANE: Karim Amrane, Air14 Conditioning, Heating, and Refrigeration 

15 Institute. 

16 MS. MAUER: Joanna Mauer, 

17 Appliance Standards Awareness Project. 

18 MS. KOHL: Betsy Kohl, Department 

19 of Energy, General Counsel's Office. 

20 MR. LLENZA: Charles Llenza, 

21 Department of Energy. 

22 DR. MARANTAN: Aris Marantan, 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 7

1 Navigant Consulting. 

2 MR. FITZ: Eric Fitz, Navigant 

3 Consulting. 

4 MS. LEGETT: Rebecca Legett, 

5 Navigant Consulting. 

6 MS. GAGNE: Claire Gagne, Navigant 

7 Consulting. 

8 MR. WEBER: Collin Weber, Navigant 

9 Consulting. 

10 MR. McCORMICK: Gavin McCormick, 

11 Pacific Northwest National Lab. 

12 MR. STRINI: Peter Strini, Tafco 

13 TMP. 

14 MR. KOUSKI: Steve Kouski, 

15 Carpenter Company. 

16 MR. BEETON: Warren Beeton, 

17 Emerson Climate Technologies. 

18 MR. RAUSS: Devin Rauss, Southern 

19 California Edison. 

20 MS. GUZMAN-LEONG: Consuelo 

21 Guzman-Leong, Pacific Northwest National 

22 Laboratory. 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 8

1 MR. STEPHENS: Charlie Stephens, 

2 Adjuvant Consulting. I represent the 

3 Northwest Energy Efficiency Alliance and the 

4 Northwest Power and Conservation Council. 

5 MR. BALLO: Tim Ballo, 

6 Earthjustice. 

7 MR. ANDERSEN: Eric Andersen, 

8 Pacific Northwest National Laboratory. 

9 MS. BRITT: Michelle Britt, 

10 Pacific Northwest National Laboratory. 

11 MS. WIDDER: Sarah Widder, Pacific 

12 Northwest National Lab. 

13 MR. PARKER: Graham Parker, 

14 Pacific Northwest National Lab. 

15 MR. BROOKMAN: Thanks to all of 

16 you. Did everybody get a chance? Okay. 

17 I think all of you received a 

18 packet as you registered at the front desk at 

19 the Department of Energy this morning and in 

20 it you ought to have an agenda, a copy of the 

21 Federal Register notice, and also the 

22 PowerPoint slides that will be the focus of 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 9

1 presentation and discussion for today. 

2 I'm going to run through the 

3 agenda briefly. If you could find a copy of 

4 it. Immediately following this agenda review, 

5 there's an opportunity for anybody that wishes 

6 to do so to make brief opening remarks, a 

7 summary of the issues that are important to 

8 you, maybe to cue up the conversation that 

9 we'll have in greater details as the day goes 

10 on. 

11 In addition to that, or following 

12 that, we'll have a rulemaking overview and 

13 following that market and technology 

14 assessments, screening analysis and 

15 engineering analysis. We'll take a break mid16 morning-ish around about 10:45. 

17 Following the break, markups for 

18 equipment price determination and energy use 

19 analysis. Then shipment analysis, life-cycle 

20 costs, payback period analysis and national 

21 impact analysis. We'll take lunch midday, 

22 12:30, 12:45 or so. Following that, a 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 10

1 description of manufacturing impact analysis 

2 and then continuing on, NOPR analyses, the 

3 next step, if you will, utility impact 

4 analyses, employment impact analyses, 

5 environmental assessment and regulatory impact 

6 analyses. 

7 We'll take a break, mid-afternoon 

8 and then proceed with a discussion surrounding 

9 test procedures and after the test procedures 

10 discussion, next steps and also an opportunity 

11 for closing remarks. 

12 I call your attention to that 

13 segment there at the end, the closing remarks. 

14 It's yet another opportunity for anybody to 

15 raise additional issues, issues that matter to 

16 you, issues that haven't been covered 

17 sufficiently from your perspective. 

18 Yesterday, we had a meeting here 

19 and some very good stuff came out in the 

20 closing segment, that's an opportunity for 

21 you. 

22 So that's the plan for today. 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 11

1 Questions and comments? 

2 Well, I would just note that the 

3 issues surrounding test procedures tend to 

4 become entwined with the issues surrounding 

5 standards. And the segment that we have 

6 allocated on the agenda, you can see it in the 

7 afternoon from about 3 to 4, as much as it's 

8 possible to segment it that way I think it 

9 will be useful and keep our discussion on 

10 track. So I'm going to try and herd it in 

11 that direction. Okay? If it doesn't work, 

12 we'll find a different way to approach it. 

13 There's a segment, there's a dedicated space 

14 for test procedure discussion. 

15 Questions about any of this? I 

16 see none. So I would ask for your 

17 consideration what has emerged as ground rules 

18 and I think common courtesies for these 

19 meetings. Please speak one at a time. Please 

20 say your name for the record. I'm going to be 

21 cuing people by name to speak as best I can. 

22 I also wish to encourage follow-on comments. 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 12

1 Sometimes the back and forth between 

2 individuals is very useful for the Department 

3 as they sort through these issues. 

4 You don't need to say your 

5 organizational affiliation every single time, 

6 just say your name. I would like for you to 

7 say your name each time you speak. There will 

8 be a complete transcript, a complete record of 

9 this meeting and it will be posted on the EERE 

10 website in the span of about seven or ten days 

11 for your purposes. 

12 If you would please keep the focus 

13 here. Put your cell phones or other devices 

14 on silent mode. If you have a sidebar 

15 conversation with the person next to you for 

16 more than about 10 or 15 seconds, please take 

17 it out of the room. These microphones work 

18 well, but the little green LED button needs to 

19 be turned on in order for us to hear you. You 

20 might as well just leave them on, unless 

21 you're going to have sidebar conversations. 

22 And if you could please, there's a 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 13

1 lot to be said, it's a full agenda, if you 

2 could be concise, share the air time as we go 

3 along today. And that's our plan. 

4 So then final -- anything 

5 additional before we proceed? Then let's 

6 start. 

7 MR. LEWIS: Yes, Harmon Lewis with 

8 American Panel. Just quickly, covering 

9 towards the PTSD, one thing of interest, you 

10 want comments on the manufacturer's markup and 

11 I was amazed that it exactly matched the 

12 markup we've been using for years and years, 

13 so my boss now thinks I'm smarter than I used 

14 to be. That's the good part. 

15 The other one, you expressed 

16 concern at the March meeting on the small 

17 business impact and just to point out that 89 

18 percent of the walk-in manufacturers are small 

19 business. This came out in your study and 

20 that's really important. And based on that, 

21 most of the cost models on all the options 

22 don't track to the small business 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 14

1 manufacturer. We're about a $20 million 

2 company and those costs, thinking that we make 

3 millions and millions of square feet of panel 

4 a year are off by a factor of 8 to 11 times, 

5 so we would be at a distinct disadvantage to 

6 the large manufacturers. 

7 We make mostly non-display walk-in 

8 coolers and freezers and as that, the 

9 refrigeration sizes picked to match up with 

10 those coolers and freezers don't match what 

11 we've done for the 43 years we've been in 

12 business and what our competition does, so I'm 

13 concerned that the cost analyses and the 

14 energy savings have started from an incorrect 

15 premise. And I've sent in paper on that 

16 already. 

17 Replacement doors, the premise 

18 that they only last five years, I'd love that 

19 because we would have multiple sales. We only 

20 build five percent replacement doors in any 

21 given year. We build 1800 doors. Less than 

22 85 a year are replacements. So I'm not sure 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 15

1 how your factor of five years came up. 

2 Shipping costs, for us, were also 

3 not aligned. We have dedicated haulers that 

4 will reduce the freight on the large units by 

5 over 60 percent from the numbers that you all 

6 had. And then the walk-in model costs, even 

7 with our markups being the same, the cooler 

8 prices were 70 to 100 percent lower than what 

9 the marketplace is charging and the freezers, 

10 anyone from 24 to 40 percent. So other than 

11 that, we'll have an interesting day. 

12 MR. BROOKMAN: Thank you. And I 

13 wanted to introduce Charles Llenza who wanted 

14 to make a few brief comments, mostly about the 

15 process forward. And then we'll take the rest 

16 of the opening remarks. 

17 I kind of took us out of sequence 

18 there. Harmon, you were on top of it. 

19 Charles Llenza. 

20 MR. LLENZA: Hi, again, you will 

21 see our comments boxes throughout the 

22 presentation and we encourage you at those 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 16

1 points and breaks to provide your comments for 

2 the record. If you have additional comments 

3 or you have comments that you haven't exactly 

4 formulated, you're also welcome to send those 

5 in and just a quick reminder the comment 

6 period ends May 28th which is a Friday. 

7 Also, the comments -- this slide 

8 here is just to show where the comments can be 

9 sent and in which formats. The most important 

10 part here is to please make sure that the 

11 docket numbers are referenced so that we can 

12 catalog the comments accordingly. 

13 The purpose of the public meeting, 

14 basically, is to present our procedural and 

15 analytical approaches in terms of evaluating 

16 the energy conservation standard for this type 

17 of equipment. This also provides a forum for 

18 discussion and in addition it provides the 

19 opportunity to hear back from our 

20 stakeholders. 

21 So we encourage all parties here 

22 attending and even those not attending to 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 17

1 submit information, data, comments, 

2 recommendations, because part of the process 

3 here is proposing what the Department sees as 

4 a path forward in terms of getting to the 

5 energy conservation standard. This process is 

6 interactive, so this is will not only be our 

7 standard, it's also will be your standard. 

8 And so this meeting will be held, 

9 we have another meeting at the NOPR stage, at 

10 the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking. These 

11 meetings are here to facilitate in the 

12 rulemaking process. So I welcome your opening 

13 remarks. 

14 MR. BROOKMAN: And Harmon, that 

15 was very succinct and very focused. I didn't 

16 want to pinch you though. Did you get 

17 everything said that you wanted to say there? 

18 Okay. 

19 So other brief statements here at 

20 the outset about issues that matter to you? 

21 Joanna? 

22 MS. MAUER: Joanna Mauer. I'd 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 18

1 just like to request an extension of the 

2 comment period. As of now, I think we only 

3 have about a week from today to respond and I 

4 think it would be helpful for stakeholders to 

5 have sufficient time to respond in writing to 

6 the issues that come up today. 

7 MR. LLENZA: The Department will 

8 take it under advisement. We've actually 

9 extended it. We usually give 45 days at this 

10 point in time. We've added a few days, about 

11 a week, because it falls on a Friday. I'm 

12 sure that if we get comments the week after 

13 that, I'm not going to be ignoring the 

14 comments. But I think part of our problem, 

15 not problem, but part of what the Department 

16 likes to do is to maintain a tight schedule, 

17 although we're starting the rulemaking process 

18 at this point. The problem is that we have a 

19 lot to do, so -- and what we don't want to do 

20 is add additional work. So would have to put 

21 a notice out on everything else. 

22 But the Department at this point 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 19

1 would probably not have any problems with 

2 getting your comments, even if they're a few 

3 days late. 

4 MS. MAUER: All right, thank you. 

5 MR. BROOKMAN: And I know that the 

6 Department would like to receive these 

7 comments sooner rather than later. If they 

8 all land on May 28, 29, or 30, then that's a 

9 lot to sort through. If they can be spaced, 

10 that's better for the Department. 

11 So then additional opening remarks 

12 here at the outset? 

13 Did everybody get a copy of the 

14 presentation materials as they registered this 

15 morning? One or two did not. So you'll leave 

16 a few additional copies for us? Just leave a 

17 few over here. 

18 MR. McHUGH: Good morning. I'm 

19 Jon McHugh and I'm here on behalf of the 

20 California Statewide Investor Owned Utility 

21 Codes and Standards Program bringing energy 

22 efficiency to 30 million customers in 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 20

1 California. 

2 As many of you probably know, many 

3 of the requirements in the existing EISA 

4 standard were first originally brought into 

5 the California's Title 20 appliance standard. 

6 So what we're talking about today is 

7 important. Refrigeration consumes 

8 approximately the same amount of electricity 

9 as does commercial air conditioning. 

10 As you probably already know, 

11 there's a series of prescriptive requirements 

12 in EISA and what we're here today is to talk 

13 about the additional performance requirements 

14 for walk-ins. And yesterday, we had a meeting 

15 about commercial refrigeration and I'd like to 

16 point out that there's actually kind of a 

17 precedent there in terms of how to isolate the 

18 appliance from the refrigeration system 

19 serving that appliance. 

20 And if you look at the commercial 

21 refrigeration equipment, we have the self22 contained unit so that you can test that selfEERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 21

1 contained product as compared to products that 

2 are remote condensing and in that -- what you 

3 do there is you look at the energy consumption 

4 of that product which is, in that case, the 

5 display case or the refrigerator, and then you 

6 use essentially a fixed EER to describe the 

7 energy consumption of the condensing unit. So 

8 that allows you to sort of draw the control 

9 volume around the piece sold together. 

10 And of course, we've already 

11 brought up the issue that a lot of times the 

12 boxes are sold separately from the 

13 refrigeration equipment, so we're really 

14 talking about sort of drawing the control 

15 volume around the unit cooler as the part that 

16 makes sense to be regulated under a walk-in 

17 regulation. And I think it actually calls 

18 into question about sort of a broader scope 

19 for the condensing unit and that that's 

20 probably the subject of a different regulation 

21 because those condensing units not only serve 

22 walk-ins, but they can serve walk-ins and 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 22

1 display cases at the same time or multiple 

2 walk-ins. And so there's a whole variety of 

3 different things. That's a fairly specific 

4 device and probably doesn't make sense to try 

5 to regulate that remote condensing unit in the 

6 same regulation. 

7 So a desirable outcome of the rule 

8 is that we end up with a situation where this 

9 appliance standard is regulated like an 

10 appliance. You know, if you buy a TV set or a 

11 refrigerator, the enforcement occurs at the 

12 point of sale. You can look at the 

13 manufacturer's catalog. You can identify -- 

14 the manufacturer ideally would be identifying 

15 those models that are compliant with the 

16 standard. The market itself is often you have 

17 the end user buying parts of the walk-in from 

18 different manufacturers. It creates for a 

19 very innovative and competitive market. So 

20 the ability to rate individual components 

21 keeps that competition in place. It reduces 

22 the restraint of trade that might be affected 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 23

1 by having a unified rating of all the 

2 components together. 

3 And what's really important and 

4 something that's currently missing from the 

5 market is credible, third party information. 

6 We know that there's problems with the rating 

7 methods. There's a number of people that talk 

8 about commercialized ratings, so to keep up 

9 with their neighbor sometimes the accuracy of 

10 the rating slips and to have that level 

11 playing field, we need third party certified 

12 ratings. 

13 If you look at the standard that 

14 DOE has based many of the comments or their 

15 TSD is based on AHRI 1250, and I appreciate 

16 the openness that AHRI did in having a very 

17 open activity for incorporating comments from 

18 many folks. But there are a series of 

19 questions around AHRI 1250. I'm not going to 

20 read each of these questions, but there's a 

21 whole issue of if someone wants to rate their 

22 product as a whole, for someone else to use 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 24

1 their condensing unit or someone else to use 

2 their indoor unit cooler, then potentially 

3 they would have to retest that product and so 

4 it doesn't have the same ability to use your 

5 product with a variety of different 

6 manufacturers unless you have those separate 

7 testing of what they call the mix-match format 

8 of testing each of those components. 

9 So anyway, I guess the other 

10 question has to do with how do we -- some of 

11 the largest efficiency measures for walk-ins 

12 have to do with the various control measures. 

13 And currently, it appears to me that this 

14 1250 test method would require that you test 

15 each of these controllers with each of the 

16 products, each of the coils that you might 

17 want to use them with. That would be 

18 extremely costly for industry. It potentially 

19 creates a barrier for new entrants into the 

20 market and from my point of view it's anti21 competitive. 

22 In terms of the TSD, there are a 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 25

1 number of measures that were not evaluated, so 

2 the first one is controls that turn off 

3 evaporator fans when the door is open. The 

4 response was or the description was well, it 

5 kind of falls between the stools in that it 

6 affects both infiltration for the box and at 

7 the same time it's a piece of refrigeration 

8 equipment. 

9 Whatever format we use, we can't 

10 use the test method as a reason not to 

11 evaluate cost- effective measures, so I think 

12 it's important that this measure be evaluated. 

13 Once you identify the savings from the 

14 measure, you can always in terms of a test 

15 method, you can develop a deemed savings value 

16 for that particular technology. 

17 Liquid suction heat exchangers, 

18 even though we entered comments in our 

19 original letter, they have not been evaluated 

20 for this proceeding. I think it's a great 

21 opportunity for modern refrigerants. Hot gas 

22 defrost, not evaluated. And I was just at 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 26

1 LightFair and there's a number of LEDs. 

2 There's a huge growth in LEDs for lighting. 

3 Almost all of the large chains are looking at 

4 LED lighting and motion controlled lighting 

5 for display cases, so it's something worth 

6 looking at. 

7 And then there's a series of 

8 questions around the TSD analysis, the issue 

9 of time termination used for the base case for 

10 defrost controls. Doug Scott, who is my 

11 technical consultant on this project said he 

12 went and looked through all of the circuit 

13 diagrams and he couldn't find any that didn't 

14 have temperature termination as an option. So 

15 why that wouldn't be the base case and there's 

16 a lot of liability issues associated with 

17 using temperature termination. So it's not 

18 realistic, in my opinion, that we use time 

19 termination as the base case. 

20 In addition, related to evaporator 

21 and condenser increases in size that 

22 particular measure, there was no increase in 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 27

1 fan power energy associated with that measure. 

2 That also doesn't seem realistic. 

3 Our understanding is that the 

4 analysis is based on uncertified data with the 

5 historical, but atypical, 65 degree return gas 

6 temperature. And my understanding is at this 

7 point we don't actually have any AHRI 1250 

8 data to base the standards on. 

9 And then finally, we've been 

10 looking at a Title 20, which is our appliance 

11 standards in California for walk-ins and we're 

12 looking a variety of different measures. And 

13 the largest single efficiency measure that 

14 we've looked at turns out to be one that 

15 doesn't seem to make it under the preliminary 

16 TSD for just about all of the freezers in the 

17 analysis. 

18 This shows the analysis that 

19 Southern California Edison did with DOE 2.2R 

20 which is a whole building simulation that 

21 includes modern refrigerants. So I guess some 

22 of the questions I guess we'll talk about 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 28

1 later on today is whether or not the model 

2 included both variable speed controls in 

3 addition to just simple on/off fan controls. 

4 So as I mentioned earlier, 

5 freezers in the TSD did not pass the minimum 

6 life cycle cost analysis that the Department 

7 had done, yet when you do this analysis we 

8 find a very fast, simple payback, very high 

9 benefit/cost ratio and actually one of the 

10 largest measures for walk-ins. So we want to 

11 make sure we don't miss this. 

12 So in conclusion, we want to make 

13 sure that the standard is easily enforced at 

14 the level of the manufacturer's catalog, that 

15 performance standards build on the current 

16 precedent with commercial refrigeration where 

17 we only look at self-contained condensers as 

18 counted as part of the walk-in. And ideally, 

19 we look at a simpler unit cooler standard that 

20 has two components, one which is a performance 

21 component which looks at a specific efficiency 

22 which is a capacity divided by its fan power 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 29

1 and also prescriptive component that looks at 

2 some fairly straight-forward large energy 

3 savings measures and primarily adjustable 

4 variable speed fan control in response to 

5 space conditions. 

6 Thank you. 

7 MR. BROOKMAN: Thank you. Other 

8 comments here at the outset? Summary remarks? 

9 Yes, Daryl. 

10 MR. ERBS: Daryl Erbs, Manitowoc 

11 Foodservice. I'll try to keep my comments 

12 brief. I think there are three areas that I 

13 have some concerns. One is a conversation 

14 that I think will be ongoing for a while, but 

15 it's -- or on the envelope -- how to manage 

16 the compliance with a standard on performance 

17 for an entire envelope that, in fact, may be 

18 site-assembled from components that come from 

19 various manufacturers. And there's some 

20 language around. It could be the assembler. 

21 In some cases that may be a pragmatic 

22 solution, but in other cases, the assembler 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 30

1 may be nothing more than a local mechanical 

2 contractor whose job is nothing more than 

3 assembling panels and doors and he may put in 

4 place, the refrigeration system. That may 

5 actually be another mechanical subcontractor. 

6 And I question whether those 

7 people are really in a position to handle 

8 responsibility for demonstration of compliance 

9 with an overall performance standard. I'm 

10 very concerned from an industry standpoint 

11 that if those people now view themselves as 

12 being liable for compliance with a federal 

13 regulation, they may elect not to continue to 

14 do their business for fear of the consequences 

15 of noncompliance, so I think we have to really 

16 look at that very carefully. 

17 Around some of the other 

18 provisions, and Jon made some note to it, 

19 there's very little data, very little hard 

20 data around performance of refrigeration 

21 systems and how they work in the actual 

22 application. Manufacturers publish 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 31

1 information, but they do that more for sizing 

2 and other application requirements. And I 

3 think I'd be cautious about reading too much 

4 into all of that data. I'm not saying it's 

5 bad data, but it just may not account for 

6 everything that is really required to do the 

7 analysis. And some of the findings in the TSD 

8 amaze me. I'd like to understand more about 

9 the assumptions. There isn't enough 

10 information available today to understand how 

11 those models were built and what are all the 

12 assumptions that go into those models. They 

13 contradict some of what I've learned over my 

14 25 years in the industry in terms of how you 

15 optimize the performance of a refrigeration 

16 system. I know we have time, but I think we 

17 really need to dig into that and understand it 

18 as well. 

19 And the third point would be to 

20 remind the Department and their contractors 

21 that this is a food safety issue in addition 

22 to an energy issue. We have NSF and other 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 32

1 standards that may in some cases preclude all 

2 of the technical options that could be used to 

3 reduce energy use that -- we need to make sure 

4 we don't put in place so many measures that we 

5 keep people from being able to use these walk6 in systems for their primary purpose which is 

7 food safety. 

8 MR. BROOKMAN: Okay, thank you. 

9 Other comments here at the outset? 

10 No additional comments here. 

11 Okay, so we'll get into more detail as the day 

12 progresses. 

13 Then let's proceed. 

14 MR. LLENZA: Okay, so we 

15 appreciate your comments and I have a little -

16 - a few questions and observation of some of 

17 the comments made. 

18 When we find problems with what 

19 we're doing, we would like that the 

20 stakeholders provide us their recommendations 

21 on how to resolve the problems because one of 

22 the things that we're struggling with is 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 33

1 making sure that what we're doing makes sense 

2 and what we're doing is based on the best 

3 available data that we know exists. 

4 But you are the experts in the 

5 industry, so we're going to rely on the 

6 feedback we get from you people in terms of if 

7 our models are correct or not, if the data 

8 needs to be beefed up or also in terms of the 

9 responsibilities of who is to certify, who is 

10 the assembler, etcetera, we would like for the 

11 stakeholders to help the Department in forming 

12 this rule. And we're at a very preliminary 

13 stage now. It's a good time to weigh in 

14 heavily with your comments and our job is to 

15 sort this out and organize it in such a 

16 fashion under the regulation so that we can 

17 have a better rule at the end of the process. 

18 We are concerned about the health 

19 and safety issues. That's going to be an 

20 interesting part of this process because our 

21 main responsibility is for the energy 

22 conservation standard, but you're right, we 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 34

1 can't ignore the health and safety issues 

2 either, because then it's a moot point. It 

3 puts your people out of business. It doesn't 

4 matter how efficient the equipment is. 

5 Let me go back to the presentation 

6 here. Pretty much we have by statute set 

7 prescriptive standards for certain components 

8 in the walk-in cooler and freezers. Also, the 

9 statute has directed the Department to conduct 

10 a test procedure. It is separate, but 

11 concurrent. So what we've tried to do as part 

12 of the process here is to make sure that every 

13 opportunity we have, that when we talk about 

14 the standard, we know that it's not completely 

15 disconnected from 

16 -- it's not disconnected from the test 

17 procedure, therefore, this afternoon, we'll 

18 have an opportunity to talk about the test 

19 procedure again, because this is still in the 

20 process of being formulated and finalized. 

21 Also, the statute directs us to 

22 come up with a performance-based standard for 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 35

1 walk-in coolers, walk-in freezers by January 

2 1, 2012 which is the subject of this 

3 rulemaking today. 

4 Here you can see is a time line on 

5 the rulemaking schedule. The Framework 

6 Document was published January 6, 2009. And 

7 the Notice for the Preliminary Analysis was 

8 published April 5, 2010. We expect to issue a 

9 NOPR spring 2011 and a Final Rule before 

10 January 1, 2012. 

11 The effective date is usually 

12 three years after the rule is published, so -- 

13 that is January 1, 2015. So even though the 

14 standard is finalized in 2012, there are three 

15 years before the statute becomes effective and 

16 this allows the industry to get organized for 

17 the new standards the Department issues. 

18 In terms of the process, this 

19 slide is a little different interpretation of 

20 how we are flowing through the process for the 

21 rulemaking. We've had a Framework Document 

22 process and today we're at the preliminary 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 36

1 analysis stage. Again, then we'll have the 

2 Notice of Proposed Rulemaking which will be 

3 spring 2011, and then a Final Rule by 2012. 

4 And today, these are the topic 

5 areas that we're going to be engaging in the 

6 preliminary analysis. We have market 

7 assessment and technology, screening analysis, 

8 engineering analysis, preliminary manufacturer 

9 impacts, energy use, markups, life-cycle cost 

10 analysis, shipments and the national impact 

11 analysis. 

12 Again, just to emphasize, the 

13 Department is developing separate standards 

14 for the envelope and the refrigeration system. 

15 DOE has conducted a market and technology 

16 assessment and engineering analysis separately 

17 from the envelope and the refrigeration 

18 system. And DOE conducted downstream analysis 

19 on combinations of the envelope and the 

20 refrigeration classes at different efficiency 

21 levels. Now again, this is a preliminary 

22 analysis, so what we're doing at this time is 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 37

1 presenting what we have found from our end and 

2 again, your comments are well appreciated, as 

3 you can see please comment on Item 1-1 here. 

4 DOE seeks comments on developing 

5 separate standards for envelopes in the 

6 refrigeration systems and that's also in the 

7 Executive Summary as ES 4.1. 

8 MR. BROOKMAN: So as Charles 

9 observed earlier, when you see these comment 

10 boxes, that's a cue to get extensive comment. 

11 So comment on developing separate standards 

12 for envelopes and refrigeration systems. 

13 Daryl? 

14 MR. ERBS: Hi, Daryl Erbs. I am 

15 still in favor of separate standards for 

16 envelopes and refrigeration standards. I know 

17 when we first started discussion around the 

18 test procedure, one of the original concepts 

19 was could we use ARI 120 as a model. That 

20 model is based on testing and integration of 

21 essentially a cabinet in the case of a display 

22 case and a refrigeration system or at least 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 38

1 the evaporator section. That works well for 

2 display case where they're very much an 

3 integral unit. Walk-ins, as we have discussed 

4 many times, are supplied very often as a box 

5 coming from one manufacturer and a 

6 refrigeration system that may come from one or 

7 more manufacturers. And there are a lot of 

8 good reasons for that, in part, because there 

9 are a lot of manufacturers who only make one 

10 of those two components. And I don't think 

11 we're going to change it in the industry. I 

12 don't think it makes sense. I think that it's 

13 a very well functioning way of satisfying the 

14 need and I don't know if we're going to get 

15 into it further, but I do want to also state 

16 that I believe for the refrigeration system we 

17 at least need to have the option to rate the 

18 entire refrigeration system, that cutting out 

19 the condensing unit from the refrigeration 

20 part will stifle innovation. It will not 

21 allow us to do things that you could do as a 

22 matched system and I would be very much 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 39

1 against putting that restriction on the 

2 refrigeration system. 

3 MR. BROOKMAN: Daryl, in this case 

4 are you speaking for yourself and your company 

5 or are you speaking for some larger group? 

6 MR. ERBS: I really have to speak 

7 for myself and my company, but in our company 

8 we have both conditions. We have one part of 

9 the company that makes only the panel systems, 

10 the boxes. We have another part of the 

11 company that supplies both boxes and 

12 refrigeration systems. So we kind of look at 

13 it both ways and it depends on the application 

14 which approach is best for the end customer. 

15 MR. BROOKMAN: Other comments 

16 about this approach that the Department is 

17 considering? 

18 Yes, Fred. 

19 MR. MINELLI: Fred Minelli. I 

20 agree that we should have two separate 

21 performance standards, one for refrigeration 

22 and one for the box, but I have some 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 40

1 difficulty understanding how a panel 

2 manufacturer and as Daryl said more than 75 

3 percent of the time we supply only panel. So 

4 how can we be responsible for design and 

5 performance of glass doors or lighting that's 

6 supplied by someone else? A contractor has 

7 nothing to do with refrigeration systems. 

8 MR. BROOKMAN: You don't have any 

9 control over the assembler? 

10 MR. MINELLI: Absolutely no 

11 control over design or the assembler. 

12 MR. LLENZA: This is Charles 

13 Llenza, Department of Energy, so how would you 

14 handle a situation like that? 

15 MR. MINELLI: The performance 

16 standard? 

17 MR. LLENZA: No, you say who would 

18 be responsible for what? Who would be 

19 responsible for which portions? How would you 

20 handle that in the field? 

21 MR. MINELLI: I think the 

22 manufacturer of each component should be 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 41

1 responsible for their component. I think 

2 we're seeing this in residential construction 

3 where they're attempting to do a performance 

4 standard, but they design an air conditioning 

5 system, someone supplies the exterior siding, 

6 the fiberglass insulation, but no one does the 

7 performance standard on that residence because 

8 there's no one who has control of the entire 

9 system. 

10 And walk-ins, we're pretty much 

11 the same way. Someone manufactures the 

12 refrigeration. Someone manufactures the 

13 panels. And most cases, we don't even 

14 manufacture the doors, someone else 

15 manufactures the doors. The lighting comes 

16 from some other contractor, some other person. 

17 The entire assembly is done by someone else. 

18 We do not have control of those systems. 

19 MR. LLENZA: This is Charles 

20 Llenza, Department of Energy with a follow up. 

21 Well, the only problem that I would have, I 

22 guess, or the Department would have is that at 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 42

1 the end of the day if everybody is 

2 responsible, then no one is responsible 

3 because the problem is you have all these 

4 components and you're putting them together in 

5 the field. 

6 Now the performance of the 

7 equipment in itself is the sum total. It's 

8 not because the compressors are efficient. 

9 It's not because you're using the best panels, 

10 it's because in the assembly process once the 

11 system is put together, this is at least my 

12 observation, is the performance of that 

13 equipment would have to do with putting it 

14 together, picking the elements for the system, 

15 and then the installation of the system 

16 itself. 

17 So I think part of our dilemma 

18 here is how does the Department guarantee to 

19 the highest level possible without over 

20 burdening the industry, of course, that the 

21 system performance is going to be there? And 

22 so part of our task -- part of this meetings 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 43

1 purpose, is if people here have some good 

2 ideas about how to do this, that you guys 

3 provide us that information subsequently after 

4 this meeting. 

5 MR. MINELLI: Fred Minelli in 

6 response. It is the end assembly that we're 

7 talking about and the actual energy usage. It 

8 is the end assembly and the glass door 

9 manufacturer has no control over that. The 

10 panel manufacturer has no control over that. 

11 The refrigeration manufacturer -- none of 

12 these individuals have control over that. And 

13 as I've mentioned in previous meetings, this 

14 certification or permitting or labeling should 

15 be done by someone at the final site, someone 

16 that is certifying the building or someone 

17 that's approving the electrical, someone needs 

18 to approve that assembly. 

19 My panels aren't designed to go 

20 together out of square and out of plumb. They 

21 will not seal. I have no control over that. 

22 If someone installs it out of square and out 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 44

1 of plumb, the energy usage would be 

2 ridiculous. But I can't control that. I 

3 can't do the certifying of a box that this guy 

4 buys and glass doors that came from someone 

5 else and lighting is installed by a site 

6 electrician and a fourth or fifth party 

7 assembles the entire structure. I do not have 

8 control of that. 

9 So if I did have control, then 

10 perhaps that should be my responsibility, but 

11 I think that the way these boxes are built of 

12 buildings, they're not a little reach-in 

13 refrigerator going down a production line and 

14 you can certify it. It is a building. It has 

15 walls, it has roofs, it has fastening systems. 

16 It withstands roof and wall loads, wind 

17 loads, seismic loads. It's a building. And 

18 it has several different trades are 

19 incorporated to assemble this structure. 

20 So I don't know a solution. I 

21 know the end site, the end location permitting 

22 agencies are more in tune to what's going on 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 45

1 in the final assemble than a component 

2 manufacturer. 

3 MR. LLENZA: Charles Llenza, 

4 Department of Energy. So at the point after 

5 the equipment is assembled, is there always 

6 some kind of permit process involved? 

7 Somebody either certifying it? Does the 

8 county send some inspector in to see to make 

9 sure that -- because it's a food and safety 

10 thing, too? Is there something that we could 

11 -- that's consistent, that's already there 

12 coming in certifying the equipment that we 

13 could maybe tack on a few other issues and 

14 maybe make that part of the process? 

15 MR. MINELLI: There are several 

16 steps in the process. You have to get 

17 permitted to start with, so someone is 

18 submitting drawings. Someone is submitting -- 

19 in many cases, the larger structures that we 

20 build, we're required to submit professional 

21 engineered staff drawings and calculations. 

22 It goes through a permitting process. Someone 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 46

1 reviews the documents to make sure that it 

2 meets a code or performance standard in this 

3 case before you even build the box. 

4 And then there's a Health 

5 Department that goes through the same process. 

6 They review the documents. They review if 

7 it's NSF labeled or not, if the assembly meets 

8 sanitation standards. And then there are 

9 inspections throughout construction like any 

10 other building so that there are many steps, 

11 there are many agencies involved in reviewing 

12 the design and assembly of the boxes. 

13 MR. BROOKMAN: Okay. Daryl. 

14 MR. ERBS: Daryl Erbs. I guess 

15 from my perspective, if you break it down into 

16 certain sub-classes of the components that 

17 make up the entire envelope, so if you look at 

18 panels, the R-value of a panel, in my view, 

19 that is a performance metric. It's how 

20 effective that panel is in controlling heat 

21 loss through that assembly. And in fact, you 

22 can include the gasketing or whatever sealing 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 47

1 system. So that's something that I think Fred 

2 would agree, as a panel manufacturer, he could 

3 have some responsibility for assuring that his 

4 panel system meets the performance standard 

5 for the heat loss for that panel system. 

6 Windows or glass doors are in the 

7 same category. There are well understood 

8 performance metrics for glazings that can be 

9 applied to those. Door seals, the 

10 infiltration control through strip curtains or 

11 spring doors or whatever, I think could all be 

12 quantified based on their impact to the 

13 overall load. And those can all be looked at 

14 on a performance level and they can all be 

15 managed at a manufacturer of that component 

16 class level. 

17 Unless the Department is looking 

18 at what is restricting what people can do with 

19 those individual component classes so saying 

20 on a display case you can only have 50 percent 

21 of the total surface area consisting of glass 

22 doors, because otherwise it's too much of an 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 48

1 energy hog, I don't see how you are able to 

2 regulate it at any other level than those 

3 basic classes of components. 

4 And then to the assembly process, 

5 I think that there's already some pretty good 

6 oversight on the part of the local health 

7 inspectors. If you have a very shoddy job of 

8 assembling the walk-in at the job site, it 

9 won't be able to hold temperature. It will 

10 not keep rodents and other bad things -- 

11 MR. BROOKMAN: Do they check that? 

12 MR. ERBS: They're supposed to. 

13 Now obviously with any local authority or 

14 jurisdiction, you have varying levels of 

15 competency, so you know, I can't say that they 

16 always do, but there's a process that's 

17 already in place that's driven around health 

18 and in a lot of cases structural and other 

19 elements that I think you should look at and 

20 decide whether that can serve a purpose or do 

21 you need to put in place some further 

22 measures, along the lines of what's happening 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 49

1 with the housing. 

2 I mean I'm going to argue that a 

3 walk-in is actually a more standardized 

4 construction than a building, so it ought to 

5 be easier to control that than a house. But I 

6 think there's a way to decompose it into those 

7 pieces and still argue that again without 

8 restricting how people can use these end9 assemblies, you're going to control the energy 

10 efficiency to whatever level that's decided is 

11 economically feasible. 

12 MR. STEPHENS: Charlie Stephens. 

13 I personally late last year researched Title 

14 20 code compliance in California for walk-in 

15 coolers and freezers. I spent about two 

16 months looking at how Title 20 did in terms of 

17 getting what was specified in their 

18 regulations in the field. 

19 It was a very interesting 

20 exercise. As Mr. Minelli said, these things 

21 are essentially a building. A permit is 

22 required to install them, but what we found is 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 50

1 that the local permit requirements did not 

2 trigger a local building inspection by the 

3 typical people who inspect buildings. This is 

4 a Title 20 product in California, not Title 

5 24. 

6 Title 24 is the energy code. So 

7 the building inspector didn't necessarily 

8 inspect this Title 20 piece of stuff even 

9 though a building permit per se was required 

10 to erect the thing. 

11 The health inspectors could not 

12 relate air infiltration to health issues. 

13 It's almost impossible to walk into any 

14 structure and just look at it and have some 

15 grasp of what the actual air infiltration is 

16 unless you put a blower door on, even a small 

17 walk-in type product, you're not necessarily 

18 going to know just what the air leakage is and 

19 where it is. 

20 There are no NFRC labels on the 

21 doors, on the glass doors like there are on 

22 windows, so your typical building inspector 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 51

1 had no idea what the thermal properties of the 

2 glass doors were on these things. There are 

3 no labels on the doors. There's no labels on 

4 anything. They didn't know what kind of foam 

5 was inside the panels, so they didn't really 

6 know what the R-value was. There was no 

7 certification paper work typically associated 

8 with any of these installations. So they 

9 didn't know exactly what they were looking at. 

10 All they could do was sort of look at it in 

11 sort of a workman-like -- you know, was it 

12 installed in a workman-like manner. And if 

13 they bothered to have a ladder to climb up on 

14 top of some of them they could inspect the 

15 refrigeration system to some extent. 

16 But again, short of having the 

17 catalog information for the manufacturer of 

18 that particular refrigeration system, and 

19 knowing anything about the unit cooler that 

20 was inside and whether the matching set, if it 

21 was a matching set, complied with any 

22 particular level of energy performance, they 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 52

1 had no idea. 

2 So the fact is what we found out 

3 in California is no one knows whether the 

4 installations of those units comply with any 

5 rules or not. 

6 MR. BROOKMAN: Then you didn't 

7 have the capacity to find out yourself? 

8 MR. STEPHENS: No. 

9 MR. BROOKMAN: You didn't do any 

10 independent testing or analysis? 

11 MR. STEPHENS: No. I personally 

12 inspected about half a dozen of them in the 

13 field and I had contractors going through 

14 check lists with people and we visited the 

15 code authorities to ask questions of them. We 

16 did a fair amount of research over a couple of 

17 months in trying to figure out what was out 

18 there and who knew what about what was out 

19 there and we basically found out that no one 

20 really knew much of anything about what was 

21 actually out there because it was really 

22 impossible find out after the fact. 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 53

1 MR. BROOKMAN: So following 

2 Charles Llenza's earlier request, do you have 

3 any ideas about how we would solve this 

4 situation? 

5 MR. STEPHENS: Well, one thing 

6 that would help immensely is just having some 

7 sort of label on these things or some sort of 

8 paperwork, standardized paperwork associated 

9 with an installation that would tell somebody 

10 if they bothered to inspect, what it is 

11 they're inspecting. No matter how you're 

12 regulated, if there's some sort of -- an NFRC 

13 label, I'll give you an example on windows. 

14 Those by rule, those things don't come off the 

15 windows until those have been inspected by the 

16 building inspector. If that were the case in 

17 a walk-in cooler and you had such a label on 

18 the doors, the glass doors, the inspector 

19 would come along and say okay, those meet the 

20 regulations, assuming you regulate those. You 

21 would have evidence that okay, those comply, 

22 those comply or those don't. 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 54

1 In terms of air leakage, short of 

2 a blower door, no. But I think if there's 

3 some sort of a label or standard set of 

4 compliance paperwork that's shipped with the 

5 box, with the assembly, whatever the assembly 

6 may be, then yes, at least they can go and say 

7 okay, ostensibly this is what I have and after 

8 a time they might learn if what they're 

9 supposed to have isn't what they're actually 

10 looking at. 

11 But there are some issues here 

12 where this crosses over between in California 

13 what's a Title 20 product and Title 24 which 

14 is kind of a level at which this thing ends up 

15 being where compliance is the factor. 

16 MR. BROOKMAN: Right. Okay, thank 

17 you. 

18 Yes, Fred. 

19 MR. MINELLI: Fred Minelli. Just 

20 a couple of additional responses to that. 

21 California is high seismic. Almost everything 

22 we do requires PD stamp decals on the 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 55

1 drawings. It's a very high seismic area. The 

2 Health Departments -- health officials that 

3 know what to look for, look for loose joints 

4 because NSF requires tight joints, gasketed 

5 joints. They require that, but inspection 

6 agencies, permitting agencies, some know what 

7 they're doing, some don't. I mean it's what 

8 you're going to deal with. 

9 The label issue, as of January 1, 

10 2009, we put a label on all of our units that 

11 stated we met the requirements of EISA because 

12 our competitors didn't do that. The people in 

13 the field had no idea what it was. So we 

14 labeled everything just to bring it to their 

15 attention. And I think the labeling is an 

16 excellent idea that each component 

17 manufacturer tests to DOE's criteria and label 

18 that they meet that criteria. 

19 MR. BROOKMAN: You label each 

20 panel, each component? 

21 MR. MINELLI: Well, we will label 

22 a box. 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 56

1 MR. BROOKMAN: The whole box. 

2 MR. MINELLI: Normally, what we do 

3 is label one in each corner and one at the 

4 door section, so that you can -- you see some 

5 inspection agencies require labels on every 

6 single panel. It just depends. 

7 Some do an excellent job of 

8 inspecting the end product and some ignore it 

9 totally. So I think a label per component, it 

10 may be the right solution in this case. 

11 MR. BROOKMAN: John Cymbalsky. 

12 MR. CYMBALSKY: John Cymbalsky, 

13 DOE. I agree with you, but I think to come up 

14 with the overall system efficiency you would 

15 have, I don't know, how many thousands of 

16 combinations of each component that could meet 

17 the standard. For example, you might have a 

18 thousand box configurations or insulation 

19 levels and then you've got the door and then 

20 you've got the mechanical system. 

21 MR. MINELLI: Fred Minelli. There 

22 aren't a thousand insulation levels. I mean 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 57

1 there is a limit to what manufacturers build 

2 in panel thickness and there's a test to tell 

3 you what the R-value is, so the panel 

4 manufacturer would be responsible for labeling 

5 the panel as meeting certain R-value based on 

6 ASTMC 518 which is the standard requirement 

7 now. 

8 The glass door manufacturers 

9 already -- there's a prescriptive standard in 

10 EISA, so all they have to do is label that. 

11 The lighting, we're going through 

12 -- there's been an issue for 20 years, so I 

13 think that -- I'm not sure who would be 

14 responsible for doing lighting labels, but 

15 some certification on that product. 

16 MR. BROOKMAN: So as I'm thinking 

17 about this, it seems like the box is what you 

18 just described there principally, what about 

19 all of the refrigeration system. Is it 

20 possible for the labeling and for those 

21 elements, those components to somehow predict 

22 a certain level of efficiency? 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 58

1 Daryl? 

2 MR. ERBS: Well, I'm going to 

3 speak to that. I mean we were involved with 

4 AHRI in working on a standard for specifically 

5 that purpose. And it's modeled largely after 

6 what's been done in the air conditioning world 

7 which is refrigeration systems can be tested 

8 and then through fairly simple calculation 

9 methods, some measure of annual energy 

10 efficiency can be derived that can be 

11 published. 

12 So whether it goes into an AHRI 

13 certification program or it's handled through 

14 some other mechanism, a value could be 

15 determined for either a match system which 

16 again I think there needs to be an allowance 

17 for that approach because it, in my opinion, 

18 has the greatest potential for really 

19 optimizing energy efficiency of a system. 

20 But that doesn't serve every case, 

21 so we also need to allow for the individual 

22 components to be somehow tested and the 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 59

1 performance stated for those individual parts. 

2 But unlike the boxes, unless you get to rack 

3 systems, big parallel, multiplex rack systems 

4 which we're not considering that because 

5 that's really more about an overall 

6 supermarket or convenience store, wherever it 

7 goes, but when you get down to dedicated 

8 refrigeration systems for walk-ins, they're 

9 not engineered to order. They may be options 

10 you can put on, different types of receivers 

11 or valves or things like that. So there are 

12 some options, but the basic combinations of 

13 compressors and heat exchangers and really 

14 even the controls that go with them, are 

15 finite in number and are cataloged. 

16 MR. BROOKMAN: And matchable. 

17 MR. ERBS: And matchable. 

18 MR. BROOKMAN: What percentage 

19 would you say would fit in that category, of 

20 what's delivered in the market? 

21 MR. ERBS: Well, when you look at 

22 the 3,000 square foot and below, I would say 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 60

1 it's more than 50 percent. It depends on the 

2 category. If you're in food service, it's a 

3 high percentage of them are basically catalog 

4 units. If you get into retail, it's a lot 

5 more variable. I mean you can have a small 

6 walk-in in a retail environment, but because 

7 it's in a retail environment and they've got a 

8 rack system, they're just going to pick a unit 

9 cooler. 

10 Again, the unit coolers tend to be 

11 for the most part pre-engineered systems with 

12 again some options. And it's up to the design 

13 person to decide well, do I want one big unit 

14 cooler or am I going to put three smaller ones 

15 in. And that's going to depend on the layout. 

16 If it's a long narrow box, they're probably 

17 going to put multiple unit coolers in because 

18 their job is to make sure that they get good 

19 uniformity of temperature in it. 

20 MR. BROOKMAN: Of course, the 

21 Department's interests here are clear. They 

22 want to assure in the final analysis and in 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 61

1 the final installation that it's performing to 

2 a certain standard and they want every way 

3 that they can to figure out how these pieces 

4 are going result in that, so if it's 

5 predictable. 

6 Charles? 

7 MR. LLENZA: Yes, in the interest 

8 of trying to get through the rest of the 

9 process here, in the afternoon session, we'll 

10 have the point that we can come back to some 

11 of these discussions. And we're very much 

12 interested in hearing what the stakeholders 

13 have to say about these particular issues. 

14 MR. BROOKMAN: That was very 

15 useful which is why that went for a while. 

16 Jon, finish this off and then 

17 we'll proceed with the agenda. 

18 MR. McHUGH: Thanks. Jon McHugh. 

19 In response to Charlie's comments about the 

20 Title 20 enforcement procedure, currently 

21 Title 24, which is our building standard until 

22 2008, which actually the 2008 standard which 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 62

1 went into effect January 1 of this year, only 

2 conditioned spaces fell under the purview of 

3 Title 24. That has changed starting this 

4 year, so refrigerated warehouses and 

5 refrigerated spaces now fall under that 

6 purview and they are inspected for the 

7 building code compliance. 

8 Currently, the spaces that fall 

9 under the Title 20 appliance standards for 

10 walk-ins, they're exempted because they have 

11 to comply with Title 20. It's our expectation 

12 that in the future that those will also be 

13 inspected for energy, but basically our Title 

14 20 standard, because of the enforceability 

15 issues, is enforced on a prescriptive 

16 approach, essentially like the approach that's 

17 already written into EISA, so looking for 

18 triple-glazed windows in the doors, looking 

19 for the R-value of the wall assembly, looking 

20 for the automatic door closers. 

21 So EISA actually already has a 

22 pretty good set of envelope measures and the 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 63

1 question is that prescriptive list of measures 

2 that's enforceable, is it actually broken? 

3 As long as we have these 

4 prescriptive measures in place, I'm not sure 

5 that the performance approach is really going 

6 to get you much. And in fact, you're not -- 

7 for the manufacturers that think that they're 

8 going to be able to reduce -- increase 

9 efficiency of one thing so that they can 

10 reduce the efficiency of another component, 

11 EISA already actually has that backstop. So 

12 I'm not so sure the Department is really 

13 getting that much additional benefit from 

14 performance measures around the envelope. 

15 I guess the only one issue might 

16 be the issue of infiltration testing, 

17 potentially blower door testing. That kind of 

18 testing, typically would occur at the level of 

19 the building standards and that would be 

20 probably most appropriately dealt with in 

21 conjunction with the Department of Energy's 

22 interaction with the ASHRAE 90.1 standard 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 64

1 which, in turn, forms the minimum efficiency 

2 standard for all commercial buildings. So I 

3 just mention that. 

4 In terms of refrigeration, the 

5 question is for the indoor unit whether or not 

6 the indoor unit has a minimum efficiency 

7 requirement regardless of the other equipment 

8 that it's attached to. And that's really, I 

9 think, kind of where Daryl and I are still 

10 probably not exactly in line, but I think 

11 overall, we agree on a lot of the other issues 

12 associated with these technologies. 

13 MR. BROOKMAN: We'll take this up 

14 in greater detail later on. 

15 Let's proceed with the next 

16 segment in the agenda, market and technology 

17 assessment. 

18 You've got probably a couple of 

19 hours to figure this out. 

20 MR. FITZ: Good morning. My name 

21 is Eric Fitz. Before I get started, I want to 

22 -- I'll just point out two things. Actually, 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 65

1 I have a follow-up question and then just one 

2 thing to point out. 

3 In the last slides in the handout 

4 that you have, there's an appendix, it's 

5 Slides 109 to the end. There's sort of a 

6 cheat sheet with all of the acronyms that 

7 we'll use throughout this presentation and 

8 there's also sort of a summary overview of all 

9 of these different analysis points that we're 

10 going to discuss. There are a lot of moving 

11 parts and when we're going through these 

12 detailed discussions these will help you sort 

13 of ground what's going on, what are the key 

14 inputs and outputs for each step in the 

15 analysis. 

16 I have a follow-up question for 

17 American Panel's opening remarks. I just 

18 wanted to clarify. You stated that there's a 

19 big difference between the prices that we're 

20 seeing in the marketplace for non-display 

21 freezers and coolers, were you referring to 

22 the manufacturer's selling price from the 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 66

1 engineering analysis in the published document 

2 or are you talking about a difference in the 

3 end-user price? 

4 MR. LEWIS: The manufacturer's 

5 selling price. 

6 MR. FITZ: Okay, thank you. 

7 MR. LEWIS: And the bigger concern 

8 was the mismatch of the refrigeration systems 

9 with the cabinets because I don't really think 

10 that they would work in the coolers. The 

11 freezers are over or undersized also. 

12 MR. FITZ: Thank you. All right, 

13 so the market and tech assessment. I'm going 

14 to first discuss the market component of this 

15 analysis. 

16 So the main purpose is to 

17 characterize what the walk-in cooler/freezer 

18 market looks like, how the manufacturers 

19 produce their products, basically how the 

20 products should be categorized or how these 

21 product classes or equipment classes, sorry, 

22 should be assigned. 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 67

1 So part of this process is to 

2 identify the key characteristics that 

3 differentiate the different equipment that's 

4 actually sold in the marketplace. And this is 

5 detailed in Chapter 3 of the published TSD. 

6 So these are the equipment classes 

7 that the Department has proposed thus far for 

8 the envelopes and the refrigeration system. 

9 They're developed based on these key 

10 characteristics that we've already talked 

11 about this morning. So for example, for the 

12 envelope, the Department is using two 

13 different classes for the non-display versus 

14 display units because glass doors, for 

15 example, by nature have a very different 

16 energy characteristic than the insulated 

17 panels. 

18 And because the glass doors are 

19 part of the utility of that product for 

20 actually displaying merchandise, DOE then sets 

21 different product classes or equipment classes 

22 such that it might be possible later on to set 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 68

1 different standards. Therefore, that would 

2 allow a manufacturer who is selling a display3 type product to comply with a unique standard 

4 from the non-display product. 

5 All of these equipment classes are 

6 mutually exclusive and collectively 

7 exhaustive, so that means that there's no 

8 walk-in envelope or refrigeration system that 

9 falls into more than one class, but all of 

10 these -- all equipment that's sold should fall 

11 into exactly one class. 

12 MR. BROOKMAN: And that's what we 

13 hope you will comment on now. Comments 

14 surrounding these classes. 

15 Dan? 

16 MR. MANOLE: Dan Manole. I'd like 

17 a clearer definition of the multiplex system. 

18 How will that include or actually not include 

19 the racks? I know that the slides I 

20 downloaded from internet before coming to the 

21 meeting had different information slightly. 

22 MR. FITZ: Sure. 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 69

1 MS. LEGETT: Sure, I can just 

2 clarify. The condensing type for the 

3 multiplex, we recognize that the multiplex 

4 condensers themselves may serve different 

5 equipment other than that particular walk-in. 

6 So in that case, we would only be regulating 

7 the part of the refrigeration that pertains to 

8 that walk-in. That would be the unit cooler. 

9 For the dedicated systems, we 

10 would be regulating the system as a whole. 

11 Does that answer your question? Thank you. 

12 MR. BROOKMAN: Thank you, both. 

13 Okay? So we still are wanting comments on 

14 this array of classes that the Department 

15 suggests will be sufficient. 

16 Harmon. Harmon first. 

17 MR. LEWIS: Yes, I have a comment. 

18 In your classes, you later talk about the 

19 numbers of units sold in a year. Is that 

20 going to be addressed somewhere in these 

21 further slides? 

22 MR. FITZ: Yes, it will. 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 70

1 MR. LEWIS: I'll just wait until 

2 then. 

3 MR. BROOKMAN: Joanna. 

4 MS. MAUER: Joanna Mauer. On the 

5 equipment classes for the envelopes, I think 

6 you certainly need to make an allowance for 

7 the area that's the glass surface, but I'm 

8 wondering whether it can just be one product 

9 class and you would have some kind of an 

10 equation where you would kind of utilize the -

11 - I think it's already the proposal to use 

12 surface area. So whether you could kind of 

13 use a weighted average of the opaque surface 

14 area and the glass surface area, but just have 

15 one product class. 

16 MR. FITZ: We'll take that into 

17 consideration. 

18 MR. BROOKMAN: Other thoughts on 

19 these product classes? 

20 I guess what the Department would 

21 like to hear is that you think this makes 

22 sense. 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 71

1 Jon. 

2 MR. McHUGH: So related to this is 

3 the existing kind of condensing type that is 

4 in the commercial refrigeration equipment 

5 which is self contained versus remote. And 

6 then so that would essentially make the two 

7 standards match up and I believe has some 

8 enforcement improvements. 

9 MR. BROOKMAN: I didn't understand 

10 that comment as it relates to these classes. 

11 MR. McHUGH: So if you're looking 

12 at the condensing type, instead of having 

13 multiplex versus dedicated, have remote versus 

14 self contained. 

15 MR. BROOKMAN: Okay, thank you. 

16 Daryl. 

17 MR. ERBS: Can I ask Jon a 

18 question? So Jon, by self contained, are you 

19 talking about a single package versus a split 

20 configuration? 

21 MR. McHUGH: I'm talking about a 

22 walk-in that has the condenser attached right 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 72

1 to the walk-in unit. So where you've got a 

2 box with a condenser on top where the 

3 condensing unit is inside the condition space 

4 typically or it can be outside, if it's an 

5 outdoor box, so for the smaller walk-ins. 

6 MR. ERBS: And I guess from my 

7 perspective, I mean we make a type of 

8 refrigeration system which is all in one box 

9 and then we actually cut a hole generally in 

10 the ceiling of the box so that the evaporator 

11 can protrude. That's a fairly small 

12 percentage of our total sales. Those systems 

13 for very small boxes are convenient, but not 

14 used that -- the rest of them are all split 

15 systems and so there are pipes that connect 

16 the evaporator section to the condensing 

17 section and the condensing section can either 

18 be inside sitting on the roof of the walk-in 

19 box or it can be outside and that's a 

20 construction issue for those. 

21 To me, those are dedicated systems 

22 and the indoor and outdoor really pertains to 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 73

1 whether the condensing unit is designed to 

2 operate over a wide range of temperatures and 

3 therefore can take advantage of different 

4 technologies. 

5 MR. BROOKMAN: Daryl, do you think 

6 that multiplex and dedicated is more 

7 descriptive? 

8 MR. ERBS: Yes, I like it the way 

9 it is. 

10 MR. BROOKMAN: Okay. Please, your 

11 name? 

12 DR. BANDYOPADHYAY: This is Gopal 

13 from Pacific Northwest National Lab. 

14 MR. BROOKMAN: Get close to the 

15 microphone. 

16 DR. BANDYOPADHYAY: DOE initially 

17 wanted to make these names consistent with 

18 what is already there for commercial 

19 refrigeration equipment as suggested by Mr. 

20 McHugh. But then what DOE realized is there 

21 is a confusion there because of these split 

22 systems which is where the condensing unit is 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 74

1 outside though it serves in the same box. And 

2 also there are units where the condensing unit 

3 is integrated with the box. 

4 So that's why DOE thought of using 

5 a common name like Mr. Erbs pointed out, 

6 dedicated system, which really encompasses 

7 both. And same way, because the multiplex 

8 also includes the rack systems, but it also 

9 might include a bank of compressors which are 

10 probably together. So that's why in the 

11 engineering literature DOE found that the 

12 multiplex name is more common compared to the 

13 rack system. 

14 MR. BROOKMAN: Thank you. 

15 DR. BANDYOPADHYAY: That is why 

16 you use this terminology. 

17 MR. BROOKMAN: Karim. 

18 DR. AMRANE: Karim Amrane, AHRI. 

19 I think what DOE is proposing here makes a lot 

20 of sense in terms of how they define the 

21 systems. 

22 I guess I have a question for 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 75

1 Navigant. In the multiplex category, how do 

2 you intend to rate the refrigeration system, 

3 according to what test procedure then? 

4 MR. FITZ: Do you want to take 

5 that, Rebecca? 

6 MR. BROOKMAN: Rebecca Legett. 

7 MS. LEGETT: Yes, this is Rebecca. 

8 So DOE's proposed test procedure that 

9 incorporates AHRI 1250-2009, that has a 

10 procedure for rating the unit cooler if it's 

11 connected to a multiplex system which assumes 

12 a certain EER multiplex system. 

13 MR. BROOKMAN: Karim, okay? Okay. 

14 I think the comments have been good. I'd 

15 like to have additional comments, this is 

16 important, these classes and how it gets 

17 differentiated. 

18 Any additional comments on that? 

19 Charlie. 

20 MR. STEPHENS: Charlie Stephens. 

21 To go back to the display and non-display, we 

22 had a discussion yesterday in the commercial 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 76

1 refrigeration discussion about display coolers 

2 and why display area is more important than 

3 volume in some of these products according to 

4 the manufacturers and how important it is. 

5 And it struck some of us that if 

6 you have a single metric for display versus a 

7 nondisplay, even if you normalize it, if you 

8 normalize it to volume, you're not accounting 

9 very well for the utility of the display and 

10 it seems to me that you're almost in a 

11 situation where you could either figure out 

12 how to combine those two and get rid of one 

13 whole layer of class here and simply 

14 incorporate the performance of the display 

15 area and the nondisplay area, the opaque 

16 versus the door, and just simply come up with 

17 a rated performance which again leads you back 

18 to almost a component performance again, the 

19 doors and the wall. 

20 So regardless of how much display 

21 area you have, you're optimizing the 

22 performance of both and there's no 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 77

1 implications for how much display area you can 

2 have. At what point, for instance, do you 

3 decide that it's a display cooler? One square 

4 foot of glass? Ten square feet of glass? 

5 Fifty square feet of class? Two hundred? 

6 MR. FITZ: Do you have a 

7 recommendation for what DOE should be using? 

8 MR. STEPHENS: I think it's a bad 

9 idea to try to set a number and then 

10 categorize this thing as a display cooler and 

11 this other thing because it has one square 

12 foot less glass than that as a nondisplay 

13 cooler. 

14 So I think you need to find a way 

15 and we may make some suggestions about how to 

16 do that, to not have to differentiate in that 

17 way, particularly if you're going to arrive at 

18 a place where you have to set a single metric 

19 for this class display, and another single 

20 metric for a different class, nondisplay. 

21 MR. BROOKMAN: I see a 

22 manufacturer or two nodding their heads, so 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 78

1 I'm going to give them a chance to speak 

2 first. 

3 Fred? 

4 MR. MINELLI: I think maybe change 

5 the description to coolers with glass doors, 

6 or freezers with glass doors rather than 

7 display. I don't think a window is what you 

8 had in mind, is it? It's for glass doors, the 

9 separation? 

10 MR. BROOKMAN: Eric. 

11 MR. FITZ: Yes, at this point as 

12 we published in the pre-analysis, we intended 

13 that it referred to glass doors. 

14 MR. BROOKMAN: Daryl. 

15 MR. ERBS: Actually, I agree with 

16 the comment. 

17 MR. BROOKMAN: Charlie's comment? 

18 MR. ERBS: Yes. I'm thinking that 

19 really what it comes down to is if we're going 

20 to go to even at a component level, the types 

21 of levels that you need to be at. If you're 

22 putting a small window in a door on a storage 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 79

1 walk-in, you might not care as much about 

2 things like anti-sweat control and other 

3 measures, compared to a true display case 

4 where a large percentage of the surface area 

5 consists of glass doors. And so it becomes 

6 very important that you pick the right levels 

7 for the performance of those doors because 

8 that's going to be 80 percent of your energy 

9 use. 

10 MR. BROOKMAN: Jon. I think we're 

11 finishing out this segment, go ahead. 

12 MR. McHUGH: Thanks. I think this 

13 leads back to -- I think what Joanna was 

14 saying earlier that potentially we can combine 

15 the metric, look at a basically two-variable 

16 equation that has opaque surface area and 

17 glazed surface area. 

18 MR. BROOKMAN: Thank you. Eric. 

19 MR. FITZ: Just the last thing I 

20 wanted to point out is that for the envelope 

21 that DOE is not considering outdoor or indoor 

22 – basically, location of the walk-in as part 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 80

1 of the product classes. I just wanted to make 

2 sure that everybody noticed that, and if you 

3 have comment, please. 

4 MR. BROOKMAN: Jon McHugh. 

5 MR. McHUGH: I think it makes 

6 sense to have different performance 

7 requirements for spaces that are exposed to 

8 110 degrees versus those that are sitting in a 

9 space that's 70 degrees 24/7. 

10 MR. BROOKMAN: Fred. 

11 MR. MINELLI: Fred Minelli. 

12 Regardless of what the minimum standard is in 

13 EISA, we would design the box for wherever 

14 it's located so that if it's outdoors, we'll 

15 design for high outdoor ambient at that 

16 location. If it's indoors, then we'll design 

17 for whether it's in a kitchen or whether it's 

18 on a grocery store floor wherever it is. But 

19 that is part of the design process. 

20 MR. BROOKMAN: So how does that 

21 relate to Jon's comment? 

22 MR. MINELLI: You're designing for 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 81

1 an outdoor box, in particular, required R2 value for high ambient versus indoor. 

3 MR. BROOKMAN: We'll hear from 

4 Jim. 

5 MR. PERRY: Generally speaking, I 

6 think like Fred is saying that design would 

7 incorporate which is inside or outside, but I 

8 think that would be more related to the 

9 refrigeration system, not the panel design, 

10 not the envelope design. 

11 Fred, would you agree? 

12 MR. BROOKMAN: Fred, go ahead. 

13 MR. MINELLI: No, we would design 

14 the envelope for delta T every time. The 

15 inside temperatures you want to maintain 

16 versus outdoor temperature, the ambient 

17 temperature. 

18 MR. PERRY: By changing panel 

19 thickness or -- 

20 MR. MINELLI: Yes, increasing 

21 R-value. 

22 MR. BROOKMAN: Daryl, go ahead. 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 82

1 And then I'm back to Jon. 

2 MR. ERBS: My only comment is if 

3 it were as black and white as either the whole 

4 box outside or the whole box inside, I think 

5 you could talk about that, but our experience 

6 is in storage. A lot of times, we'll have one 

7 wall which is facing outside because they want 

8 an external access point for delivery of food. 

9 And then the rest of it is inside because 

10 they want the door for the daily inventory use 

11 to be inside. I think you're just going to 

12 open up a huge can of worms if you try to 

13 create that classification. 

14 MR. BROOKMAN: Jon, final comment, 

15 and we're moving on. 

16 MR. McHUGH: This again leads back 

17 to essentially requirements by the location of 

18 the wall. So for instance, a freezer wall 

19 where the freezer is inside of a refrigerator, 

20 should that wall be -- the full R-value that 

21 should call for a freezer, so I think it makes 

22 sense to have a series of different 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 83

1 conditions. Outdoor, indoor, sort of what we 

2 call demising wall, but it's actually two 

3 different temperatures between a freezer and a 

4 refrigerator. 

5 MR. BROOKMAN: Harmon. 

6 MR. LEWIS: One point we don't 

7 want to miss, the outdoor-installed walk-in 

8 you save the energy of not building additional 

9 building space inside that I know DOE can't 

10 probably measure, look at, but overall trying 

11 to save energy if you put the walk-in 

12 outdoors, you saved a ton of energy the day it 

13 arrives. 

14 MR. BROOKMAN: Thank you. 

15 MR. FITZ: I have two follow-up 

16 questions, one for Kysor Panel. Other than 

17 thickness of the panels, what other features 

18 or design changes do you make specifically for 

19 outdoor units that impact energy? 

20 MR. MINELLI: Fred Minelli. R21 value is what we're designed for. We design 

22 for delta T and the envelope is a very simple 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 84

1 process. There's nothing there but R-value. 

2 MR. FITZ: So it's just R-value. 

3 Okay. And then how often do manufacturers 

4 know whether a unit -- say -- you probably 

5 know if it's going to be installed at least 

6 partially outdoors, but how often do you know 

7 which wall will be outdoors versus indoors if 

8 there's this split? 

9 MR. MINELLI: Fred Minelli. You 

10 have to know where it's going so you can 

11 design for the snow load, wind load, the 

12 application of that box. You would have to 

13 know where it's going. It's a very, very 

14 small part of our industry, manufactures a box 

15 and sells it, doesn't know if it's cooler, 

16 freezer or where it's going to go. Then, too, 

17 you're going to run into permitting issues. 

18 MR. BROOKMAN: Most of the time 

19 you get a site plan or something. 

20 MR. MINELLI: We get an 

21 architectural drawing. 

22 MR. BROOKMAN: Okay. 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 85

1 MR. FITZ: Thank you. Okay, so 

2 the second piece of market and technology 

3 assessment is the technology assessment. This 

4 is where the Department develops a preliminary 

5 list of technologies that can improve the 

6 energy efficiency of freezers and coolers. 

7 The main sources for this 

8 brainstorm exercise is a broad literature 

9 review, both from academia and industry, 

10 documents such as manufacturer's marketing 

11 brochures and then a key input. I want to 

12 reiterate this is from stakeholders, comments 

13 from manufacturers, from other interested 

14 parties on what the technologies that are out 

15 there that DOE should be evaluating. 

16 So please comment. I'm going to 

17 show the list that the Department came up with 

18 in the next couple of slides, but please let 

19 us know if there are additional technologies 

20 that we've overlooked. 

21 So I'm not going to go through 

22 each one of these technologies, but there's a 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 86

1 lot of detail in the published documents. So 

2 for all envelope equipment classes, these are 

3 the applicable technologies. And then there's 

4 a group just for display. 

5 And the same way for refrigeration 

6 equipment. There's a split for -- based on 

7 these different equipment class groups. 

8 MR. BROOKMAN: Let's deal with the 

9 envelope first. Comments on these 

10 technologies listed. Are we missing anything? 

11 Doug. 

12 MR. ROBERTS: Doug Roberts. We 

13 fall into the insulation category and I guess 

14 one of the interesting comments through this 

15 morning session has been relative to 

16 separating components and defining their 

17 values. 

18 At the same time, there's an issue 

19 that revolves around this and that is there 

20 can be substantial, with some of the 

21 technologies, there can be substantial 

22 differences in their performance based on the 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 87

1 integrated system. 

2 We work closely with the home 

3 appliance industry. A lot of changes have 

4 needed to be made to compresser systems and 

5 other components in order to optimize the 

6 total solution that's out there. 

7 So you kind of have this 

8 interesting balance of technologies and how 

9 they fit together and the effect on the 

10 overall system and how you control that if you 

11 do separate. So separation is a good thing in 

12 the sense that it's easy to measure. At the 

13 end, in the end-use application, have you 

14 sized everything correctly, both for the 

15 health and safety practices and the energy 

16 consumption. It does become an issue. 

17 MR. BROOKMAN: Okay. That's the 

18 integration issue. 

19 Looking at the list of 

20 technologies here on Slide 21 and 22, comments 

21 on what is there and particularly what the 

22 Department may have missed. 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 88

1 Jim. 

2 MR. PERRY: Jim Perry. On the 

3 wall, ceiling, and floor insulation, when you 

4 use the word insulation we should maybe also 

5 include another separate one for panel 

6 gaskets. You've got door gaskets, but all the 

7 panels are gasketed also which forms a seal 

8 and creates the infiltration barrier. 

9 And then you've broken out that 

10 only display envelopes have the anti-sweat 

11 heater controls and that would not be correct. 

12 All freezers go out with anti-sweat controls 

13 on their doorways. 

14 MR. FITZ: Are those anti-sweat or 

15 just door heaters? 

16 MR. PERRY: Correct. 

17 MR. FITZ: They're door heaters 

18 you mean? 

19 MR. PERRY: Correct, and also 

20 vents are sometimes heated and windows in the 

21 doors. So just because it's not a display 

22 cooler or freezer, it certainly has some of 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 89

1 these other features associated with the 

2 display cooler. 

3 MR. FITZ: Thank you. 

4 MR. BROOKMAN: Thank you. 

5 MR. FITZ: Your first comment on 

6 the gasketing, that's captured in this panel 

7 interface system category. Thank you for your 

8 comment. 

9 MR. BROOKMAN: Other thoughts on 

10 this list of technologies? Pretty complete? 

11 Okay, if we uncover any additions, 

12 we'll hear from you. Let's move on then to 

13 refrigeration systems. 

14 Yes, Jon. 

15 MR. McHUGH: John McHugh. I just 

16 wanted to go back and just repeat again that 

17 LED with motion control for your display 

18 portion of the envelopes. 

19 MR. BROOKMAN: Okay. 

20 MR. FITZ: Yes. 

21 MR. BROOKMAN: Then to 

22 Refrigeration Systems, the next slide 23. 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 90

1 Yes, Gordon. 

2 MR. BEETON: Warren Beeton, 

3 Emerson. I think you might want to 

4 differentiate between high efficiency 

5 compressors and modulated compressors because 

6 they require often times modulated or control 

7 of other elements of the system to take full 

8 advantage of the modulating compressor such 

9 as evaporator fans and condenser fans, full 

10 controls, so forth. 

11 MR. BROOKMAN: Thank you. 

12 MR. STRAUB: Mike Straub, 

13 Heatcraft Refrigeration. I don't know if this 

14 is the right time for this, but on the 

15 analysis like improved evaporator coils where 

16 you went and looked at fins for interfin 

17 spacing and increasing it. I want to make 

18 sure you take into consideration frost 

19 accumulation as well as the actual product 

20 that is being stored. For instance, floral, 

21 you don't want to dry things out. If you put 

22 too many fins in there, then you have to worry 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 91

1 about moisture removal. 

2 On the high efficiency fan blades 

3 or the evaporator fan blades, I wasn't sure 

4 your analysis if you included the fan motor in 

5 your analysis. Because it looked like what 

6 you picked were EC motors or external rotor 

7 motors which have been shown to have higher 

8 efficiency and then attributed that with the 

9 actual shape of the fan blade as opposed to 

10 looking at the dynamics of the fan blades by 

11 themselves. 

12 MR. FITZ: Did you want to address 

13 that, Rebecca? 

14 MS. LEGETT: Maybe we can discuss 

15 that in engineering. 

16 MR. FITZ: Okay. Yes, we can 

17 discuss that in a later analyses. 

18 MR. BROOKMAN: Yes, Daryl. 

19 MR. ERBS: Daryl Erbs. It's a 

20 very complete list, but I feel compelled to 

21 point out there are a couple areas that one 

22 thing that I don't know if you've looked at. 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 92

1 But you know there's an option to look at 

2 cascade systems. It doesn't make sense at a 

3 very small size but when you get into larger. 

4 You have down economizer cooling, 

5 but there are also refrigeration technologies 

6 to do economize cycles. So in addition to 

7 ambient subcooling I guess there are other 

8 subcooling or economizing cycle options that 

9 can improve refrigeration cycle efficiency 

10 that you may want to look at. 

11 MR. BROOKMAN: Okay. Thank you. 

12 Rebecca. 

13 MS. LEGETT: Follow-up question 

14 for Gordon. If you could, can you describe 

15 exactly what you mean by modulating 

16 compressors? Do you mean variable speed 

17 compressors? 

18 MR. BEETON: Warren Beeton. 

19 Several different types. Variable speed is 

20 one. Mechanical capacity control, digital or 

21 other techniques. Two speed or multi-speed. 

22 MR. BROOKMAN: I apologize. You 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 93

1 said your name is Warren. 

2 MR. BEETON: Warren, yes. 

3 MS. LEGETT: I'm sorry. 

4 MR. BROOKMAN: I apologize. We 

5 both apologize. We misnamed you. 

6 MR. BEETON: That's all right. 

7 MR. BROOKMAN: We won't do that 

8 again. Warren, thank you. 

9 MR. BEETON: That's all right. 

10 MR. BROOKMAN: Okay. 

11 So any additional comments on 

12 refrigeration technologies? Yes. Warren. 

13 MR. BEETON: Warren. One more 

14 comment. On the integration of the systems, 

15 this may be obvious to most. But I think it's 

16 important that when these evaluated that the 

17 combinations of these can be -- If you've got 

18 certain assumptions about the systems, if 

19 you've got some of these technologies in the 

20 system and then you add another one to it, you 

21 may get an entirely different answer if you 

22 add that technology to the system that doesn't 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 94

1 have these others. So you can't make very 

2 simple conclusions about the value of any of 

3 these without looking at how they're combined 

4 with other technologies. 

5 MR. BROOKMAN: Okay. 

6 Yes, Dan. 

7 MR. MANOLE: Dan Manole. For 

8 other applications, we can consider to have 

9 cooling and heating effect. I'm thinking that 

10 in this case if we want to increase the 

11 efficiency of the system, if we want to 

12 provide heat for defrost or subcooling by 

13 integrating or adding to the walk-in cooler 

14 another system that will provide heating 

15 effect or something else, ice maker, whatever, 

16 will that be considered as a hybrid system, 

17 hybrid walk-in? That is not covered by this 

18 standard. 

19 MR. FITZ: I'm not sure I exactly 

20 understand what your question is. 

21 MR. MANOLE: For example, there 

22 are some bottle coolers that they are 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 95

1 increasing the efficiency of that product by 

2 using the heat generated back-up compressors 

3 to make coffee. 

4 MR. FITZ: Gotcha. 

5 MR. MANOLE: Something like that. 

6 If I attach to this walk-in something that 

7 will use -- will superheat further the gases 

8 for example for cooling something else, for 

9 ambient, for air conditioning or whatever. 

10 MR. FITZ: So just using waste 

11 heat to do something else. 

12 MR. MANOLE: Right. Either waste 

13 heat or using some of the cooling effect. 

14 Will that application be considered as a 

15 hybrid something that will not be subject to 

16 these standards? 

17 MR. BROOKMAN: Charles. 

18 MR. LLENZA: This is Charles 

19 Llenza. No, we wouldn't consider this part of 

20 the original system. So that would be -- I 

21 mean if you have excess heat and you think of 

22 a way of using the excess heat to your 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 96

1 advantage that would be not something that we 

2 would be concerned about. 

3 MR. MANOLE: Thank you. 

4 MR. BROOKMAN: Thank you. 

5 Final comments on this? John, do 

6 you have one more comment? 

7 MR. McHUGH: Yes. I just wanted 

8 to try to identify that there are multiple 

9 types of evaporator fan control whether it's 

10 variable speed or a switching type control. 

11 So there is multiple types of control. I 

12 don't know if you've looked at that. 

13 And then it's not really clear 

14 what you mean by defrost controls since there 

15 is a range of defrost controls. Are you 

16 talking about these advanced controls that are 

17 sensing frost build-up or are you just looking 

18 at temperature termination? Hopefully, 

19 there's some clarification about that. 

20 MR. FITZ: There are a number of 

21 details in the published TSD. So you can look 

22 there unless, Rebecca, you want to comment on 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 97

1 that. 

2 MS. LEGETT: We can in 

3 engineering. We can get to it there. 

4 MR. BROOKMAN: We'll take it up in 

5 engineering analysis. Okay. Great. 

6 MR. FITZ: So the next step after 

7 the Department has done this brainstorming 

8 exercise to come up with all of the possible 

9 technologies we then perform a screening 

10 analysis. This is a process that eliminates 

11 certain technologies based on specific 

12 criteria. 

13 The first is that a given 

14 technology is not actually feasible, like it's 

15 not commercially available, whether it's 

16 practicable to the manufacturer, if it has 

17 some kind of adverse impact on the utility of 

18 the product or on health or safety. 

19 So DOE performed that analysis and 

20 these are the technologies that were 

21 eliminated and we seek comment on these 

22 technologies. 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 98

1 MR. BROOKMAN: Jon. 

2 MR. McHUGH: I guess it's not 

3 screened out. It actually wasn't on the list. 

4 Liquid suction heat exchangers was brought up 

5 earlier. It wasn't on the earlier list. So 

6 it wasn't screened out yet. 

7 MR. BROOKMAN: Thank you. 

8 MR. McHUGH: Or included. 

9 MR. BROOKMAN: Gotcha. Okay. 

10 What do you think? Are these the 

11 ones to be screened out? Harmon, say it for 

12 the record. 

13 MR. LEWIS: Yes. 

14 MR. BROOKMAN: Yes. Okay. 

15 Karim. 

16 DR. AMRANE: Karim Amrane, AHRI. 

17 I guess I have a question about the economizer 

18 cooling here. Obviously, it will make sense 

19 only in certain application and I'm not sure 

20 how you screened out the technology that makes 

21 sense for all application I guess. I don't 

22 know how this is accounted for in your -- 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 99

1 MR. FITZ: Do you mean the process 

2 for -- 

3 DR. AMRANE: I mean, yes. The 

4 economizer cooling. Is it something that you 

5 take into account when you do your analysis? 

6 MR. FITZ: Do you want to address 

7 that, Rebecca? 

8 MR. BROOKMAN: Rebecca Legett. 

9 MS. LEGETT: So we did screen that 

10 out here because as you said it's only 

11 applicable in certain locations and would not 

12 be useful for all consumers. 

13 DR. AMRANE: I'm sorry. It was 

14 screened out. Okay. Fine. 

15 MS. LEGETT: Yes. This list is 

16 all -- 

17 DR. AMRANE: I misread. 

18 MS. LEGETT: If anyone disagrees, 

19 thinks it shouldn't be screened out. 

20 DR. AMRANE: I agree with you. 

21 Sorry. 

22 MR. BROOKMAN: Thank you. 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 100

1 Okay. Yes. Warren. 

2 MR. BEETON: Warren, very quickly. 

3 The economizer cooling I guess I don't 

4 understand why that would have been screened 

5 out. There can be a significant efficiency 

6 gain under the right circumstances of 10, 20 

7 percent. 

8 MR. BROOKMAN: Rebecca. 

9 MR. ERBS: Just let me jump at 

10 Warren. He's talking about bringing in 

11 outside air into the box. 

12 MR. BROOKMAN: Okay. Thanks for 

13 that clarification. 

14 Yes please. Go ahead. 

15 MR. STRAUB: Mike Straub, 

16 Heatcraft Refrigeration. Just for my benefit, 

17 the screening out, does that mean that if a 

18 manufacturer has this technology that they 

19 can't take advantage of that or is this just 

20 in your analysis? 

21 MR. FITZ: This is just the 

22 technologies that will not be considered in 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 101

1 the analysis. 

2 MR. STRAUB: Okay. So you could 

3 incorporate that technology and get the energy 

4 benefit. But how would that manufacturer then 

5 be able to go to the marketplace and say, "I 

6 have this" without DOE backed? 

7 MR. FITZ: If it's captured in the 

8 test procedure, then you can see the benefit 

9 from it. 

10 MR. STRAUB: Okay. 

11 MR. BROOKMAN: Dan. 

12 MR. MANOLE: Dan Manole. I think 

13 that we should not exclude out higher 

14 efficiency of operator fan motors because that 

15 brings some cost increase and as Warren 

16 mentioned the high efficiency compressor will 

17 go hand-in-hand with the modulated capacity. 

18 And when you do that you will need to -- I 

19 think you will need to have also variable 

20 speed fans. So you should include that in my 

21 opinion the cost increase due to high 

22 efficiency fan motors. 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 102

1 MR. BROOKMAN: Okay. 

2 Jon. 

3 MR. McHUGH: Dan, I think this is 

4 related to the prescriptive requirements for 

5 ECM motors when you're looking at a fractional 

6 horsepower motors. So it's already in the 

7 base standard prescriptively. So that's why 

8 they're not including it as a measure that 

9 they're going to evaluate because it's already 

10 there. 

11 MR. LLENZA: Charles Llenza, 

12 Department. It's not an option. It's 

13 actually part of the standard already as a 

14 prescribed requirement. 

15 MS. LEGETT: Yes, and I want to 

16 clarify. Higher efficiency means higher than 

17 what's already prescribed, so anything that is 

18 more efficient than an ECM motor. We weren't 

19 aware that there were any of these motors in 

20 use. But if people are aware please tell us. 

21 MR. BROOKMAN: Okay. Thanks. 

22 That was good clarification. Okay. 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 103

1 MR. FITZ: With that, I'll pass it 

2 off to my colleague. 

3 MS. LEGETT: Hi. This is Rebecca 

4 Legett. And I'm going to take over where Eric 

5 left off and talk about the Engineering 

6 Analysis. I want to echo what Charlie said 

7 earlier about feedback on models, our 

8 assumptions, our data. I want to emphasize 

9 this is a preliminary analysis and we are 

10 interested in hearing your recommendations on 

11 how we can improve our models and our 

12 assumptions. So please feel free to present 

13 that and also to submit that in written 

14 comments. We would very much appreciate 

15 hearing that. 

16 The purpose of the engineering 

17 analysis is to characterize the relationship 

18 between a manufacturer's selling price and the 

19 walk-in energy consumption. For various 

20 efficiency levels, equipment incorporating 

21 various technologies, how does that affect the 

22 selling price of the equipment? 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 104

1 Again, DOE performed the 

2 engineering analysis separately for envelopes 

3 and refrigeration systems. In connecting that 

4 analysis, DOE also chose a few representative 

5 units from the market and for the envelope we 

6 chose three different sizes per class to 

7 analyze and for the refrigeration system DOE 

8 chose two sizes. And we'll present details of 

9 those sizes and ask you to comment in a couple 

10 of slides. 

11 For each unit, DOE determined the 

12 baseline configuration which would be the 

13 least efficient unit that is sold on the 

14 market today. So it would have to meet all 

15 the EISA requirements. But otherwise it would 

16 be the least efficient unit. And then DOE 

17 examined the effect of adding improved 

18 technologies to each unit. And the 

19 methodology and results are presented in 

20 detail in chapter five of the preliminary TSD. 

21 The overall approach was a design 

22 option approach which means that for each of 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 105

1 these representative sizes for each class DOE 

2 first calculated the energy consumption costs 

3 of a baseline unit. Then DOE added advanced 

4 technologies to the baseline and then 

5 calculated the reduction in energy consumption 

6 and also the incremental cost. And finally 

7 DOE sorted the technologies in order from most 

8 to least cost effective and the result is a 

9 cost efficiency curve which shows that 

10 relationship between energy consumption and 

11 manufacturer selling price. 

12 So now I'm going to get into some 

13 of the inputs and the assumptions that we made 

14 for creating these cost efficiency curves. 

15 And then finally at the end of the analysis 

16 discussion I'll show examples of cost 

17 efficiency curves. And there will be 

18 opportunity for comment at various points when 

19 you see the comment boxes. 

20 One assumption we had to make was 

21 on which representative sizes to analyze. And 

22 here's a very, very high level overview of an 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 106

1 approach to selecting these representative 

2 sizes. And this has implications for the 

3 engineering analysis and also for downstream 

4 analyses, for instance, the overall energy 

5 use. 

6 The important points here are 

7 first of all what are divisions between. This 

8 would be for envelopes because you have three 

9 sizes, small, medium and large. What are the 

10 divisions between those and also within those 

11 divisions what is the representative size? 

12 And in a sec I'll ask for your comments on the 

13 assumptions that we made. 

14 These are the assumptions that we 

15 made for representative equipment sizes for 

16 envelopes and refrigeration systems and you 

17 may have comments on this. In fact, actually, 

18 let's go ahead and ask for comment on these 

19 representative sizes. 

20 MR. BROOKMAN: Okay. Fred first. 

21 MR. MINELLI: Fred Minelli. I'm 

22 just curious about the sizing. Looking at the 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 107

1 envelope in my perspective, the refrigeration 

2 is really the only thing that's going to 

3 change. The R-value of the panel does not 

4 change. So how does size or how are you 

5 seeing size affect the performance of the 

6 envelope? 

7 MS. LEGETT: These are analysis 

8 points. So for each size we would calculate 

9 the energy consumption. This is just to get a 

10 sense of exactly what you're saying of how 

11 does that change versus size. 

12 MR. MINELLI: But this is not the 

13 direction of the final ruling or is? You're 

14 just trying to develop information, baseline 

15 information? So it really has nothing to do 

16 with R-value of the envelope. It's just a 

17 combination of refrigeration envelope and 

18 whatever else. 

19 MS. LEGETT: I'm still not quite 

20 sure what you're asking, but these are just 

21 examples. 

22 MR. MINELLI: My concern is that I 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 108

1 build panels. Panels have R-value. It 

2 doesn't matter in our perspective if the box 

3 is 10 X 8 or 25 X 30. It still has a certain 

4 R-value. 

5 MS. LEGETT: Okay. 

6 MR. MINELLI: It's still energy 

7 efficiency. It's not going to change. 

8 MS. LEGETT: Okay. We're trying 

9 to get a sense of energy consumption for a 

10 class. 

11 MR. MINELLI: Yes, to prove that 

12 I'm correct. 

13 (Laughter.) 

14 MS. LEGETT: And maybe Eric can 

15 speak to that. 

16 MR. FITZ: This is Eric Fitz. I 

17 just wanted to comment. In general, these 

18 size characterizations are most useful for the 

19 downstream analysis where the Department is 

20 actually quantifying the total energy save for 

21 the entire country. So these are meant to try 

22 to reflect like the highest frequency or the 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 109

1 most common units that are actually shipped. 

2 And then based on estimates of how many exist 

3 currently and then predicting how many of 

4 these different types will be shipped in the 

5 future, the Department can then calculate an 

6 overall energy savings. So it's to get a 

7 picture of the real benefit or cost will be. 

8 MR. BROOKMAN: And if there were 

9 sizes that were more representative that would 

10 be useful to know. 

11 MR. LLENZA: This is Charles 

12 Llenza, Department of Energy. This has to do 

13 more with the shipments in terms of us 

14 analyzing the shipments of the different types 

15 of equipment. And we're just trying to 

16 categorize within the sizes so that we have a 

17 better idea of what kind of shipments we're 

18 facing in terms of the industry and in terms 

19 of stock, replacement stock and the actual 

20 market of what's being shipped out. 

21 MS. GAGNE: Claire Gagne. I think 

22 to your point, Fred, the distinction is that 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 110

1 the classes are not affected by the sizes. 

2 They are purely for analysis pieces that feed 

3 into engineering type analysis that we need to 

4 do. But the classes as proposed in a previous 

5 slide are not affected by these size 

6 distributions. I think that's the crux of 

7 your question. 

8 MR. MINELLI: Sure. My concern -- 

9 Fred Minelli again. My concern is required 

10 performance testing of boxes. If this is 

11 information gathering not a requirement for me 

12 to process my product annually or whatever. 

13 MR. LLENZA: This is Charles 

14 Llenza. You're correct. 

15 MR. MINELLI: Okay. All right. 

16 Thank you. 

17 MR. BROOKMAN: Okay. Thank you, 

18 Charles. 

19 Jim. And then I'm coming back to 

20 Harmon. 

21 MR. PERRY: Going back to the 

22 slide -- this is Jim Perry -- that you have 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 111

1 small, medium and large with the different -- 

2 That one there. The question marks I'm 

3 assuming you're looking for input on what 

4 becomes small change as to medium. Given that 

5 the EISA requirements are all below 3,000 

6 square feet shouldn't it be end lined? Not 

7 have a continuing arrow? That it should be at 

8 3,000 square feet and below and probably most 

9 of us would agree that's a medium size 

10 anyways. Anything above 3,000 could be called 

11 large and then just split into two sections? 

12 MS. LEGETT: Is that what you 

13 would recommend? Just consider -- 

14 MR. PERRY: Yes. 

15 MS. LEGETT: Okay. Thank you. 

16 MR. BROOKMAN: Yes. I see Mike up 

17 there. 

18 MR. STRAUB: Yes, I would agree. 

19 Mike Straub from Heatcraft Refrigeration. I 

20 would agree that the sizes that you've chosen 

21 are a bit small because of the 3,000 square 

22 foot and below. And I understand the concept 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 112

1 of we wanted to see where really the sweet 

2 spot is in the market from the perspective of 

3 units sold, etc. 

4 But if I think about what you've 

5 picked I mean the biggest box is 500 square 

6 feet. I mean we sell equipment that's much, 

7 much larger that we're impacted by this. Your 

8 energy analysis where you looked at scrolls 

9 and said, "Scrolls are more efficient than 

10 hermetic compressors," in those sizes, we 

11 wouldn't even use scrolls because scrolls are 

12 not available technology now. We would be 

13 using semi-hermetic compressors. 

14 I think you need to reevaluate 

15 that and look at higher sizes. And then if 

16 you want to weight the sizes based on your 

17 products sold then you can do some type of 

18 weighting scale to say, "Okay. More units of 

19 the smaller size are sold to convenience 

20 stores, etc." But you have distribution 

21 warehouses, etc., that would have much larger 

22 sizes and much larger equipment. Three-phase 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 113

1 fan motors and those type of technologies 

2 would be common. 

3 MR. BROOKMAN: Can you be specific 

4 what should be the sizes? What should be the 

5 break points? 

6 MR. STRAUB: I don't have a 

7 specific because we don't make boxes. We make 

8 the refrigeration systems. So I think it 

9 would be good if box manufacturers could give 

10 a better idea of what would be large. But I 

11 think it needs to be something that's going to 

12 get us much closer to the 3,000 square foot 

13 for large, in that range. 

14 MR. BROOKMAN: Okay. 

15 Harmon. 

16 MR. LEWIS: I was going to address 

17 something else, but I'll say that one first. 

18 You've got a bell curve on what walk-ins you 

19 make and most of this is sweet spot. And we 

20 can go way out towards the 3,000 square foot. 

21 But how many of those are we going to make in 

22 a given month? It's a very small number. 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 114

1 I know you're trying to get a 

2 distribution of energy and see where it is. 

3 So maybe you've got those three sizes and then 

4 maybe you've got something out that's extra 

5 large at the 3,000. 

6 But the bigger issue, the one that 

7 I mentioned earlier, up there you've got 12 

8 different walk-ins between nondisplay and 

9 display and all those sizes. And in the 

10 dedicated systems like we build you've got 

11 four refrigeration sizes. You probably need 

12 10 or 12 to have any semblance of real world 

13 operation. 

14 When you put that small-medium 

15 temp indoor, medium temp outdoor unit at 

16 12,000 or 15,000 BTUs on a small, little 

17 nondisplay cooler that needs 5,000 BTUs you've 

18 got a rain forest. The labels would fall off 

19 of whatever's in there. It's just not real 

20 world. So any data you determine from that 

21 doesn't mean anything. It's just a badly 

22 designed experiment. 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 115

1 MR. BROOKMAN: So if we state your 

2 recommendation, it's they need more -- 

3 MR. LEWIS: You would need more -- 

4 You would need -- Whatever size walk-ins you 

5 chose you would have to size the refrigeration 

6 to match the heat load of the walk-in. That's 

7 what all the manufacturers do day in and day 

8 out. And if you don't do that, then the 

9 refrigeration won't be at the optimum size and 

10 you know just real world it won't operate to 

11 the satisfaction of the user. 

12 MR. FITZ: This is Eric Fitz. I 

13 can respond to both of those comments. So the 

14 first one about this bell curve or this 

15 histogram of units that are shipped, the 

16 Department would really like that type of 

17 information if you have that available. 

18 Please submit it as formal comment because 

19 that would help characterize this for us. 

20 And then your second comment, this 

21 issue of matching the refrigeration equipment 

22 to the envelope, we're actually going to 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 116

1 discuss that in later slides. And we agree 

2 that's a very important issue. There's a very 

3 detailed sort of methodology of how we went 

4 about that. 

5 MR. LEWIS: But how do you match 

6 four systems to that many walk-ins? It 

7 doesn't work. 

8 MR. FITZ: Yeah. We'll get into 

9 that. But it's a good comment. 

10 MR. BROOKMAN: Daryl. 

11 MR. ERBS: My comment would be 

12 though is on the refrigeration I don't think 

13 small is really representative of small and I 

14 think that's what Harmon's saying. 

15 And the issue is as you go from 

16 small to large, you know, to Mike's point also 

17 you go through different technology classes 

18 for compressors and even other components. 

19 And so what goes into a 15,000 BTU per hour 

20 medium temp unit versus a 5,000 may be a 

21 different base level of performance for 

22 something like a compressor. And so my 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 117

1 concern would be by not considering a wide 

2 enough range we may be misrepresenting some of 

3 the smaller systems. 

4 MR. BROOKMAN: Thank you. 

5 MS. LEGETT: Can I ask a follow-up 

6 question? You got into something that we 

7 actually have thought about which is whether 

8 we should create different equipment classes 

9 instead of different size analysis points. 

10 Would you -- Is that what you would recommend? 

11 MR. ERBS: Well, I'm not sure I 

12 want to recommend that because that would 

13 probably be my headache later on. 

14 (Laughter.) 

15 You know I think we have to be 

16 careful -- I want to keep this as simple, as 

17 few different categories as possible. But if 

18 you look at a five horsepower, let's say a 10 

19 horsepower semi-hermetic compressor, it's 

20 going to have twice the efficiency of a 

21 fractional horsepower hermetic compressor. 

22 And if you drive the minimum 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 118

1 efficiency metric based on what you can do on 

2 the large size, we won't be able to make small 

3 size equipment anymore. So we probably need 

4 to look at that. 

5 MR. BROOKMAN: The Department 

6 wants this to be as simple as possible and yet 

7 adequately descriptive. 

8 MR. ERBS: So if you set a low 

9 enough standard we can live with that. 

10 (Laughter.) 

11 MR. BROOKMAN: Got it. Okay. 

12 Yes. 

13 MS. LEGETT: All right. If those 

14 are all the comments. So this was the 

15 representative sizes. 

16 And the second part here is the 

17 list of technologies for envelopes and 

18 refrigeration systems. These are the 

19 technologies that were not screened out in the 

20 screening analysis. These are also 

21 technologies that can be accounted for in the 

22 proposed test procedure. So if it couldn't be 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 119

1 accounted for in the proposed test procedure, 

2 we couldn't really consider it. 

3 And one that Mr. McHugh mentioned 

4 was auto evaporator fan shutoff when the door 

5 is opened. Because the proposed test 

6 procedure separates the envelope and the 

7 refrigeration system, it doesn't account for 

8 that kind of technology. So these are the 

9 ones that we ended up with. 

10 So I think we've already covered 

11 Items 2.4 and 2.5 in the previous slides. But 

12 Item 2.6, again we see coming-on technologies 

13 that could improve the efficiency and also 

14 questions on these technologies. 

15 MR. BROOKMAN: Any -- Yes, Harmon. 

16 MR. LEWIS: A couple of items 

17 here. Panel interface system, I guess the 

18 improved routing. I'd like to hear some 

19 description of that. Also the different items 

20 there on the envelopes that you all related 

21 again to what it would cost an individual 

22 manufacturer. I think you're off by a factor 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 120

1 of like I mentioned eight to 11 times the 

2 impact on most every manufacturer that's in 

3 this room and that was in the room at the 

4 March meeting. Based on our volumes, you 

5 picked a very nonrepresentative number. 

6 But what is the new improved panel 

7 interface system because I want to hear it and 

8 nobody else. 

9 (Laughter.) 

10 MR. FITZ: Sure. This is Eric 

11 Fitz. The improved interface system is this 

12 idea of having a better way, a better tongue 

13 and groove design, that would make sure that 

14 there's a more precise interlock between the 

15 different panels so that you ensure that the 

16 panels are going to be more square, that 

17 there's going to be uniform pressure 

18 throughout the entire gasket of the interface, 

19 and that can help improve the or reduce the 

20 infiltration. 

21 There are other options in there. 

22 For example, if you had gasketing that itself 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 121

1 has a higher R-value so that you reduce 

2 thermal bridging throughout the panel 

3 interface. So it captures these individual 

4 components and this sort of engineering design 

5 system approach to that region of the panel. 

6 Different geometries whether it's like a 

7 standard tongue and groove where you have the 

8 tongue going into a groove or whether you have 

9 a very unique geometry that provides more 

10 uniform pressure or reduces infiltration. 

11 MR. LEWIS: Have you ever seen 

12 how we build these panels? How you inject the 

13 foam? How you've got to get it out of the 

14 mold? The more intricate you make that the 

15 harder it's going to be to build it? I'm not 

16 against that. 

17 We also have another expression. 

18 We say, "This isn't rocket science." So we've 

19 got to watch that what we make is possible. 

20 The other thing, your improved 

21 wall seal and floor insulation, you show 

22 thicknesses I think from below four inches out 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 122

1 to seven inches. Most manufacturers probably 

2 have fixtures depending on what they bought 

3 them that might be adjustable from four to 

4 maybe six inches depending on the tooling. 

5 I think you misestimated the 

6 reduction in manufacturing capacity. As you 

7 do more size panels, when we're got a 24 foot 

8 or 26 foot long platform we make maybe three 

9 panels at once. They've all got to be 

10 thickness and you've got to do changeover on 

11 tooling. 

12 So I think there's a whole lot of 

13 cost there you have to watch out for. And the 

14 more variables in the manufacturing process 

15 the more chance for repair work to what you 

16 manufactured. So the more complex you make it 

17 the harder it's going to be and the more it's 

18 going to cost to build it. 

19 MS. LEGETT: Okay. 

20 MR. FITZ: At least to address the 

21 question about improved wall ceiling and floor 

22 insulation, the range was up to seven inches 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 123

1 in the published TSD. DOE actually found 

2 examples of manufacturers that offer up to 12 

3 inches. But we felt like that was a little 

4 bit outside of what's typically used for food 

5 service for what's -- 

6 But there's a broad range and 

7 these are technologies that are feasible that 

8 are available. It's possible while it might 

9 be more expensive. I mean that's what we're 

10 trying to capture in this analysis is the 

11 additional cost associated with going to 

12 thicker panels. But it's available. It's 

13 possible. So it's considered. 

14 MR. BROOKMAN: Okay. 

15 Jim. 

16 MR. PERRY: Just to follow-up with 

17 Eric. This is Jim Perry. Basically this is 

18 brainstorming ideas. There are no improved 

19 panel interface systems that you know of that 

20 Harmon could get that would give us these 

21 things. And also this is based on 

22 assumptions, not testing, correct? We don't 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 124

1 know that the current systems available have 

2 any measurable infiltration. 

3 MR. FITZ: There's a -- 

4 MR. PERRY: Spending a lot of 

5 money to make a new panel interface that's 

6 solving no problem. 

7 MR. FITZ: Right. So the analysis 

8 is based on both assumptions and then also 

9 available research that's been done by 

10 academia and then industry. 

11 MR. PERRY: Okay. 

12 MR. FITZ: That covers issues such 

13 as infiltration and thermal bridging, all of 

14 these energy related components. 

15 MR. BROOKMAN: Daryl. 

16 MR. ERBS: Yes. I have a request 

17 of Rebecca. Rebecca, when I went through the 

18 TSD there was a lot of detail around how you 

19 actually did the performance modeling that I 

20 would be very interested in understanding. 

21 There are some very basic level equation. 

22 But, for example, the larger condenser there's 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 125

1 what I would describe as a overly simplistic 

2 equation in there. If that's the entire basis 

3 for how you're modeling the benefit of a 

4 larger condenser coil, then I would have 

5 concerns. 

6 There may be a lot more detail 

7 behind that you didn't see fit to put in the 

8 TSD. But I think that's where we would really 

9 need to understand. Because we have some 

10 practical experience that we'd be more than 

11 happy to share with you that when you make a 

12 condenser coil larger some other things happen 

13 and so you might not get all of the benefit 

14 that a simple model might predict. 

15 MR. BROOKMAN: It sounds like a 

16 conversation that you might commence at lunch 

17 or over the break which we're going to take 

18 here very shortly. So let's take final 

19 comments on these technologies that are listed 

20 here on slide 33. 

21 Jon. 

22 MR. McHUGH: One other question is 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 126

1 in California we have -- Through EISA we're 

2 allowed to have one more Title 20 appliance 

3 standard that will stay in effect until the 

4 2015 effective date of this standard. And the 

5 question is how are you guys going to 

6 accommodate or use that standard in the final 

7 standard that you're going to adopt here. 

8 And the reason I ask the question 

9 is that there's a series of technologies here. 

10 And it's likely or at least where we're 

11 looking at going to is having an additional 

12 prescriptive standard for both floating head 

13 controls and evaporator controls, evaporator 

14 speed controls. So how is this new standard 

15 going to adapt to that given the history of 

16 most of these other standards adopting what 

17 the states have adopted earlier? 

18 MR. LLENZA: Charles Llenza, 

19 Department of Energy. I think the Department 

20 first of all would like to make sure that 

21 California provides us as much information as 

22 possible of what you're adopting to see how we 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 127

1 could better utilize that for our standard's 

2 purposes. 

3 And of course if it's a fantastic 

4 idea we would most likely look at the national 

5 effect of that within our standard making 

6 process here and potentially adopt that as a 

7 national standard. But at this point we don't 

8 know enough about it. 

9 MR. McHUGH: It's concurrent. 

10 MR. LLENZA: Yes. So part of the 

11 proceedings here is to make sure and we have a 

12 public proceeding is to make sure that we are 

13 keeping up with other events that are 

14 occurring in the industry and throughout and 

15 the states and in terms of their regulations. 

16 We're at a good point now. The 

17 more information we get in terms of what 

18 you're actually doing would be beneficial to 

19 the Department to see if that's going to serve 

20 the purpose for a national standard. Thanks. 

21 MR. BROOKMAN: Yes. Karim. 

22 DR. AMRANE: Karim Amrane, AHRI. 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 128

1 I guess I would to correct a little bit what 

2 Jon said. He mischaracterized what happened 

3 with the standard. Yes, most of the EISA 

4 requirements are based on California and 

5 they're not exactly what California had 

6 adopted in the first place. It was an 

7 agreement which was reached with the industry 

8 in order that resulted in what you have in 

9 EISA and what this rulemaking process is all 

10 about. 

11 So I guess I'd like to caution you 

12 in assuming that what California will be doing 

13 will be default something that DOE has to 

14 consider. That's all. Thanks. 

15 MR. BROOKMAN: Thank you. 

16 I'm mindful that we might need a 

17 break. Can you proceed with the rest of the 

18 engineering analysis slides? 

19 MS. LEGETT: Sure. There might be 

20 extensive comment on -- 

21 MR. BROOKMAN: Do you think so? 

22 So then let's take a break now. Obviously, 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 129

1 that caution let's take a break. It's ten 

2 minutes after 11:00 a.m. We'll take a break 

3 for 15 minutes which means we'll resume at 

4 11:25 a.m. 

5 We're probably going to go at 

6 least another hour or so before we take lunch. 

7 So if that means you need to grab a donut or 

8 something please do so. Wear your badges if 

9 you would while you're in the building and how 

10 many of you are not familiar with the 

11 Forrestal Building. Follow everybody else to 

12 the coffee shop and then go quickly because 

13 they're not very efficient. Although maybe 

14 right now they're okay because it's not a busy 

15 time. 

16 So we'll resume at 11:25 a.m. 

17 Thanks for a good start on the day. We've 

18 really covered a lot of ground already. Off 

19 the record. 

20 (Whereupon, a short recess was 

21 taken.) 

22 MR. BROOKMAN: On the record. 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 130

1 Okay. We're going to resume where we left 

2 off. And Rebecca Legett's going to describe 

3 further engineering analysis beginning on 

4 slide 35. 

5 MS. LEGETT: Okay. If everyone's 

6 back. So to try to organize some of these 

7 comments, comments that people are going to 

8 have probably on these next few slides, just 

9 very briefly first I'm going to go through the 

10 model, a high level overview of the model, for 

11 envelope and refrigeration. And this is how 

12 the end result of the energy consumption is 

13 calculated. The next thing is to talk about 

14 the cost model, how DOE came up with cost for 

15 the equipment. And finally, the last part of 

16 the engineering analysis is actually showing 

17 some example curves and talking about the 

18 effect of improved technologies. 

19 So here we have a model, the 

20 envelope engineering model, and these are all 

21 the things that feed into the daily energy 

22 consumption that is calculated. And I want to 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 131

1 note that for both envelope and refrigeration 

2 these energy calculation models are really 

3 based on test procedure methodology, the 

4 proposed test procedure methodology. 

5 So to the extent that you want to 

6 comment on that just be aware that for the 

7 stuff that depends on the test procedure 

8 that's a separate analysis. Does anyone have 

9 any comments on the envelope? I'm not really 

10 going to try to explain each piece of this. 

11 MR. STEPHENS: Charlie Stephens. 

12 I just have one question down there at the 

13 bottom, the non-electric load, where you've 

14 got conduction, steady-state infiltration and 

15 door opening infiltration. 

16 MS. LEGETT: Okay. 

17 MR. STEPHENS: Do you know off the 

18 top of your head in a round number what 

19 fraction of the total load of those three 

20 combined is door opening infiltration load? 

21 MR. FITZ: This is Eric Fitz. I 

22 can't remember the exact number, but it's a 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 132

1 very large portion. 

2 MR. STEPHENS: Okay. And do you 

3 have anything that you can explain as to how 

4 you calculated that? 

5 MR. FITZ: So for the door opening 

6 infiltration, that's based on the proposed 

7 test procedure and that laid out the 

8 methodology that's been adopted by ASHRAE. So 

9 it's the ASHRAE equations for based on the 

10 door geometry, the door opening frequency, the 

11 difference in temperatures between the inside 

12 and outside of the walk-in, etc. 

13 MR. STEPHENS: Is there any data 

14 that backs up that model that you know of? 

15 MR. FITZ: Yes. It's based on 

16 Gosney and Olama from 1975 and then there's 

17 been a number, I'd say, a dozen papers since 

18 then that have done empirical testing and 

19 actual computational modeling to simulate and 

20 make sure that those empirical equations are 

21 accurate and they seem to be quite good. 

22 MR. STEPHENS: Okay. 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 133

1 MR. BROOKMAN: Thank you, Charlie. 

2 Harmon please. 

3 MR. LEWIS: Yeah, that door 

4 opening load by ASHRAE ends up being about 35 

5 to 40 percent of most walk-in coolers or 

6 freezers of the heat load. 

7 MR. BROOKMAN: Thank you. Okay. 

8 Daryl. 

9 MR. ERBS: Daryl Erbs. I think 

10 the only question I had is -- I mean the 

11 infiltration models I'm pretty confident with. 

12 The big question is the number of door 

13 openings and what the basis for -- I think 

14 it's 60 openings a day. 

15 MR. FITZ: Sure. Do you have 

16 comment or recommendations for what the 

17 assumptions should be for the analysis for 

18 whether it's a passage door, whether it's a 

19 glass display door or whether it's a freight 

20 door what the assumptions should be. 

21 MR. ERBS: I'm working on that. 

22 MR. FITZ: Okay. 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 134

1 (Laughter.) 

2 MR. FITZ: But the numbers were 

3 based on what are typically used in other 

4 research that's been done in academia and in 

5 industry that we came across. But I would 

6 love -- We would love your input on what you 

7 believe these numbers should be. 

8 MR. BROOKMAN: Eric, does the TSD 

9 say what the numbers were? 

10 MR. FITZ: Yes. 

11 MR. BROOKMAN: It does. Okay. 

12 Thank you. So you can comment on that. 

13 So Rebecca left the question on 

14 the table about any additional thoughts or 

15 questions surrounding this flow chart on 35. 

16 So anything additional on that before we move 

17 on? 

18 Jon. 

19 MR. McHUGH: Rebecca, what's the 

20 watts per square foot for your lighting load? 

21 MR. FITZ: It's the EISA minimum 

22 requirement. 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 135

1 MR. McHUGH: That's lumens per 

2 watt not a -- 

3 MR. FITZ: I'm sorry. The 

4 efficacy is based on EISA. That's right. 

5 Lumens per watt. But there is no -- We're 

6 not doing any -- As we published, we're not 

7 considering a component based standard. It's 

8 a system standard. 

9 MR. McHUGH: No, I understand. 

10 But for your model you need to know a watts 

11 per square foot so you can put the watts into 

12 your model. 

13 MR. FITZ: Sure. So it's 

14 different depending on the lighting 

15 technology. So there's tube fluorescence. 

16 There's then the bulbs for like nondisplay. 

17 So that's a CFL. And then there's also 

18 considerations for LED lights. 

19 MR. McHUGH: And is that 

20 documented in the TSD the watts per square 

21 foot? 

22 MR. FITZ: Yes. 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 136

1 MR. McHUGH: Okay. 

2 MR. BROOKMAN: With no additional 

3 comment, Rebecca, move us on. 

4 MS. LEGETT: All right. So the 

5 same thing for the refrigeration energy model. 

6 And this is also based on the AHRI 1250 test 

7 procedure. 

8 I think coil capacity on the left 

9 should actually be compressor capacity. 

10 MR. BROOKMAN: Maybe the colors of 

11 the different boxes, tell us what they are. I 

12 don't see a legend. 

13 MS. LEGETT: Not really. It's 

14 just on what level it is. Yes. 

15 MR. BROOKMAN: Okay. 

16 MS. LEGETT: Okay. 

17 MR. BROOKMAN: Jon. 

18 MR. McHUGH: For your off-cycle 

19 fan power, what are you using when you're 

20 looking at fan controls? 

21 MS. LEGETT: That's actually one 

22 of the technology options, but I can mention 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 137

1 that here. For the AHRI 1250 test procedure, 

2 I think it's the greater of what the controls 

3 actually are or 25 percent of the I think duty 

4 cycle. And so we used 25 percent as the 

5 highest or 25 percent of the on-cycle fan 

6 power as the lowest off-cycle fan power that 

7 you could have. And if that's not correct 

8 please correct me. 

9 MR. McHUGH: And for the on-cycle 

10 fan power when you have a rack system, how are 

11 you modeling fan power? Because in that 

12 situation, it's not like you have you're at 

13 full load or at part load. You're at part 

14 load most of the time. So are you modulating 

15 your fan speed? 

16 MS. LEGETT: We did not consider 

17 modulating the fan speed when the compressor 

18 is actually running. Yeah, when the 

19 compressor is actually running. If you think 

20 we should and you can recommend methodology by 

21 which we can incorporate that please do so. 

22 MR. McHUGH: Okay. So 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 138

1 recommendation is DOE 2.2R directly models 

2 modulating of the fan speed. So it directly 

3 models the fan speed and the fan energy and 

4 the improvement in heat transfer under those 

5 part load conditions. So that would be my 

6 recommendation. 

7 MS. LEGETT: Thank you. 

8 MR. BROOKMAN: Additional thoughts 

9 on refrigeration energy model? Or questions? 

10 (No verbal response.) 

11 MS. LEGETT: All right. So next 

12 I'm going to talk about the cost model that we 

13 used for the engineering analysis, both the 

14 cost model and the inputs and we've had 

15 several comments so far critiquing our costs 

16 and we welcome those comments. And if you can 

17 provide specific recommendations, again that 

18 would be very helpful. 

19 I'm going to discuss the cost 

20 model and the inputs that DOE used to develop 

21 the manufacturer selling prices. You see 

22 there are three inputs, manufacturer 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 139

1 production cost, manufacturer markups and 

2 outbound freight costs. I'm going to talk 

3 about each of these as inputs to the 

4 manufacturer selling price and then I'm going 

5 to ask for comment on our assumptions. So if 

6 you'll bear with me for the next few slides 

7 I'll explain each of these parts. 

8 The full equipment cost, the 

9 manufacturer production cost, consist of 

10 direct material, direct labor, factory 

11 overhead and depreciation. And DOE found that 

12 the bulk of this manufacturer production cost 

13 can be attributed to the direct material and 

14 also the direct labor costs. The factory 

15 overhead markup accounts for costs associated 

16 with equipment, indirect materials, energy 

17 use, taxes and insurance. 

18 The next component is the 

19 manufacturer markup and DOE estimated the 

20 manufacturer markup from publicly available 

21 financial information. That is SEC 10k 

22 reports filed annually by publicly-held 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 140

1 corporations. Information contained in these 

2 reports such as total revenues allowed DOE to 

3 estimate corresponding markups for each 

4 manufacturer and thus an estimate for the 

5 industry as a whole. And you can see that the 

6 estimate that we found, the aggregate, was 

7 1.39 and we heard a comment saying that that 

8 sounded about right. But if that doesn't 

9 sound right to you please let us know when we 

10 ask for comment the slide after next. 

11 And finally DOE assumed that 

12 manufacturers included their outbound freight 

13 cost. That is the cost of shipping from the 

14 manufacturer to the next stage in the 

15 distribution chain. And this outbound freight 

16 cost varies by volume and weight. 

17 At this time, we'll ask for 

18 comment on all three of these assumptions. 

19 Maybe we can go one at a time. 

20 MR. BROOKMAN: So manufacturer 

21 production costs first. Daryl. 

22 MR. ERBS: I guess my question 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 141

1 would be again down in the details. As you're 

2 putting these design options in, what costs 

3 are you associating with those design options? 

4 It's not clear to me if you change at a 

5 component level do you fully reflect all the 

6 other changes that might occur to the unit or 

7 are you just estimating the cost for, let's 

8 say, a higher efficiency compressor or 

9 something? 

10 MR. BROOKMAN: What other costs 

11 would there be, Daryl? 

12 MR. ERBS: Well, I guess I can 

13 keep harping on the same example. If I put a 

14 bigger condenser coil in, I may need a larger 

15 cabinet. Did you account for all of the 

16 additional sheet metal costs associated with 

17 that larger cabinet? 

18 MS. LEGETT: Yes, we did attempt 

19 to quantify this. 

20 MR. FITZ: And there are lots and 

21 lots of details on this in the chapter five 

22 that was published. 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 142

1 MS. LEGETT: To the extent that 

2 you feel that we didn't account for some 

3 costs, please make recommendations. 

4 MR. BROOKMAN: I guess your 

5 purpose in laying out this cost model is to 

6 show everyone basically your methodology so 

7 that they can comment on aspects of it that 

8 are incorrect or missing. 

9 Yes, Harmon. 

10 MR. LEWIS: Again I already put it 

11 in on my comments last week. But your 

12 outbound freight cost, you need to look at for 

13 larger shipments, the dedicated haulers. 

14 Because your costs are off and you may be 

15 about that -- about two or three times which 

16 will factor into your overall price. 

17 MS. LEGETT: Thank you. 

18 MR. BROOKMAN: So three different 

19 aspects of this cost model, manufacturer 

20 production cost, manufacturer markup and also 

21 outbound freight. Comments on any of those 

22 three? 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 143

1 Harmon. 

2 MR. LEWIS: One other one. A lot 

3 of the times the outbound freight cost 

4 although it's on our quotation is not 

5 typically on the purchase order that we 

6 receive because the freight may be billed by 

7 the freight company to that food service 

8 equipment dealer and such. So it's not 

9 necessarily a part or it. 

10 It's probably on maybe 15 or 20 

11 percent of the purchase orders more likely 

12 because it's a chain account that we lump that 

13 in. But most individual purchases the freight 

14 is paid by dealer, by the end user, and it's 

15 not part of that. It becomes part of the 

16 overall cost landed at the job site, not part 

17 of our cost. 

18 MS. LEGETT: Okay. Thank you for 

19 that comment. And we realize that this may 

20 vary throughout the industry. So we welcome 

21 other. Does anyone else have comment on that? 

22 Yes. 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 144

1 MR. BROOKMAN: Jim. 

2 MR. PERRY: Jim Perry. We found 

3 ourselves in the same situation as Harmon that 

4 sometimes freight is part of the selling price 

5 and sometimes it's not. 

6 MS. LEGETT: Can you give a 

7 percentage of how often it is or isn't? 

8 MR. PERRY: I could probably 

9 research it for you and get back to you on 

10 that, Rebecca, but not right off the top of my 

11 head. 

12 MS. LEGETT: Okay. If you could 

13 submit a written comment, that would be very 

14 helpful. 

15 MR. BROOKMAN: Other comments on 

16 these elements of cost modeling? 

17 MR. LLENZA: Charles Llenza, 

18 Department of Energy. I realize that some of 

19 this information may not be just here at the 

20 meeting right now. But this is important 

21 because it's part of our baselines. So if 

22 everybody can take a better look at the TSD 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 145

1 chapter five, right, to make sure that we're 

2 on track with what we're putting in there. 

3 Because part of the baseline when we start 

4 doing the cost estimates at the beginning it 

5 will affect a lot of our modeling downstream. 

6 MR. BROOKMAN: Daryl. 

7 MR. ERBS: Daryl Erbs. I mean 

8 I've read through everything that's in chapter 

9 five and I guess what I don't know is where 

10 you started from. I mean there's a dollar 

11 amount for the different technology options. 

12 But as I recall you went out and 

13 found some manufacturer's data, published 

14 data. There isn't the level of test data that 

15 you'd probably like and somehow had to back 

16 out of that some base system design 

17 information or maybe that was part of the 

18 manufacturer's. But if you're able to share 

19 any more detail it might make our job a bit 

20 easier of saying is that reasonable or 

21 unreasonable. Otherwise we almost have to go 

22 through the same analysis on our own to say 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 146

1 "Do we get to the same end conclusion that you 

2 have in terms of how much does it cost for 

3 floating head pressure control? How much does 

4 it cost for a better fan? How much does it 

5 cost for a better heat exchanger?" 

6 MR. FITZ: Where we commented that 

7 it was based on manufacturer information, as 

8 you can imagine particularly cost data is very 

9 sensitive. Some manufacturers don't like to 

10 share that. So whenever we make that 

11 reference that means we received information 

12 from at least three manufacturers and we 

13 averaged that data. And we were specifically 

14 protecting the manufacturers from disclosing 

15 where we got that data. 

16 However, manufacturers if they 

17 choose to are welcome to submit information 

18 public forum, either through written comment 

19 or in this forum right now, of what you think 

20 the cost should be for a certain component or 

21 additional labor associated with a design 

22 option. 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 147

1 MR. LLENZA: And that brings -- 

2 this is Charles Llenza, Department of Energy -

3 - us to another point. When you send 

4 information to the Department and it's marked 

5 private, we don't disclose that to anybody. 

6 It doesn't even get in the docket formally. 

7 We actually we put a notation that we received 

8 the comment or the information. But that 

9 information then is not reflected in the 

10 docket because what's in the docket is for 

11 public consumption and if it's been marked 

12 company private or proprietary or something 

13 like that, then we take the extra step to 

14 protect the information from the public. 

15 That's part of our confidentiality agreement 

16 in this process. 

17 MR. BROOKMAN: Eric, if you have 

18 three bits of data and you average them, you 

19 use that. But you don't disclose the sources. 

20 MR. FITZ: That's correct. 

21 MR. BROOKMAN: Okay. So final 

22 comments on these? 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 148

1 MS. LEGETT: Particularly the 

2 markups, you'll notice that the markups were 

3 based on publicly available data from publicly 

4 traded companies. What we understand about 

5 the industry is that a lot of the businesses 

6 are small, privately-owned, may not publish 

7 that information. So we want to account for 

8 that in our analysis, but basically the only 

9 way we can get that kind of data is if you 

10 tell us. Maybe not necessarily right now, but 

11 in written comments. 

12 Okay. Next I'm going to talk 

13 about -- I'm going to show two example cost 

14 efficiency curves and explain a little bit 

15 about them and how we arrived at them and then 

16 give you an opportunity to comment, ask 

17 questions, critique our methodology and please 

18 do so. 

19 Here we have an example cost 

20 efficiency curve for the envelope. A few 

21 things to note about this graph. This first 

22 point here labeled Baseline, that is again the 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 149

1 least efficient walk-in of this type and size. 

2 You'll notice this is a medium, non-display 

3 cooler with medium being characterized in the 

4 previous slide on the representative sizes. 

5 We calculated that a baseline -- least 

6 efficient -- medium non-display cooler would 

7 use that much energy and cost approximately 

8 that much. 

9 Then all the other dots represent 

10 adding one technology at a time to that 

11 baseline and this is -- we've calculated the 

12 cumulative effect. So you have the rightmost 

13 dot which is the baseline. The next dot to 

14 the left is adding the first technology 

15 option. The second dot to the left is adding 

16 the second technology option. So you have 

17 both one and two implemented in that envelope. 

18 And then that last dot there 

19 labeled Max Tech, that is what we call the 

20 maximum technologically feasible walk-in 

21 envelope, the one with all of the design 

22 options implemented. Comments please. 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 150

1 DR. AMRANE: Karim Amrane, AHRI. 

2 I guess for clarification the baseline is EISA 

3 2007, right? 

4 MS. LEGETT: Yes. It's the least 

5 efficient walk-in that can actually be sold. 

6 So it must comply with the EISA 2007 

7 prescriptive requirements. 

8 MR. LLENZA: This is Charles 

9 Llenza of the Department. This is just an 

10 example. We've picked a medium, non-display 

11 cooler and for all of the different classes of 

12 walk-in coolers/walk-in freezers that we 

13 developed models for, we will have a similar 

14 curve developed for that. So this is just an 

15 example of how we're doing this for 

16 illustrative purposes. 

17 MS. LEGETT: Yes. 

18 MR. LLENZA: We didn't want to 

19 list them all. 

20 MS. LEGETT: Right. All the 

21 curves for all of the classes and sizes are 

22 contained in chapter five of the TSD. 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 151

1 MR. BROOKMAN: Charlie. 

2 MR. STEPHENS: Charlie Stephens. 

3 I'll just note here that one of the reasons I 

4 asked you about the infiltration earlier was 

5 that I looked at all the curves that you 

6 generated and pretty much for all of them in 

7 the boxes it varies a little bit, but you're 

8 showing that about half of the total energy 

9 use of the box can saved with strip curtains 

10 or shall we say the strip curtain measure. 

11 And I'm assuming that the strip curtain 

12 measure is not 100 percent effective at 

13 stopping door infiltration. So I'm assuming 

14 that more than half of the energy load of the 

15 box is strip curtain or is infiltration from 

16 the door since you can't save what you didn't 

17 use. 

18 MR. FITZ: So just a comment on 

19 effectiveness on strip curtains. 

20 MR. STEPHENS: Yes. 

21 MR. FITZ: The number we're 

22 currently using is 0.9 or 90 percent 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 152

1 effective. 

2 MR. STEPHENS: Okay. So if you go 

3 from just under 12 to just under six kilowatt 

4 hours per day with that one measure, it's 90 

5 percent effective. So I'm sort of reading 

6 that as half or more of the total load in 

7 kilowatt hours per day used by this box and 

8 all the boxes because it's pretty much the 

9 same on all of them. 

10 MR. FITZ: Sure. 

11 MR. STEPHENS: It's half. 

12 MR. FITZ: Right. So for this 

13 particular example and for this particular 

14 baseline, that's true. 

15 MR. STEPHENS: Okay. And, yeah, 

16 like I said, I looked at all of them and 

17 they're all pretty much the same for the 

18 boxes. 

19 So I'm a little skeptical about 

20 that I have to say. I'd be a lot happier if 

21 it were more like one-third. But the reason I 

22 say that is because I've done this work with 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 153

1 this kind of a cost efficiency, life cycle 

2 cost curve doing code work and if you get that 

3 first one wrong because it's big it affects 

4 all of the subsequent ones fairly 

5 substantially in some cases. So I really hope 

6 you worked really hard at getting that first 

7 one right because it really does diminish the 

8 apparent cost effectiveness of everything 

9 subsequent. 

10 MR. FITZ: That's right and we've 

11 tried our best. And so please submit your 

12 comments on how you think we should adjust the 

13 analysis, you know, how we should change our 

14 assumptions, etc. 

15 MR. BROOKMAN: Thank you, Eric. 

16 MR. FITZ: Because we recognize 

17 this is important. 

18 MR. BROOKMAN: Okay. 

19 Yes, Harmon. 

20 MR. LEWIS: Eric, that 90 percent 

21 efficiency, was that from the strip curtain 

22 manufacturer or from academia? Because our 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 154

1 strip curtain manufacturers don't say as high 

2 as 90 percent. 

3 MR. FITZ: So that's from multiple 

4 academic research papers. 

5 MR. BROOKMAN: Jim. 

6 MR. PERRY: Just a quick question. 

7 Did you say, Charles, that this is not an 

8 accurate graph or is this actually one of the 

9 graphs out of the TSD? 

10 MR. LLENZA: I said that this was 

11 a representative graph of what we would do for 

12 each different one. 

13 MR. PERRY: There are 12 data 

14 points up there and only eight technologies 

15 identified for the envelope. 

16 MR. FITZ: Those technology 

17 groupings, they're actually multiple options 

18 within each category. For example, the wall, 

19 ceiling and floor insulation, you could change 

20 the underlying materials whether you used like 

21 a -- 

22 MR. PERRY: You applied one to the 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 155

1 floor and then another data point for the wall 

2 and another data point for the ceiling. 

3 MR. FITZ: Exactly. And then you 

4 could have different thicknesses as well. 

5 MR. LLENZA: It's a clarification. 

6 It's not a one-to-one ratio on the 

7 technology. 

8 MR. PERRY: Okay. And is there 

9 somewhere that correlates each of the data 

10 points with what technology was applied? It's 

11 in the TSD. I can review that. Okay. 

12 MR. FITZ: Yes, it is. 

13 MR. PERRY: Thank you. 

14 MR. BROOKMAN: Thank you. 

15 Yes, Jon. 

16 MR. McHUGH: I have a question 

17 around why strip curtains are even not listed 

18 here in that they are part of the prescriptive 

19 requirements of EISA. 

20 MR. BROOKMAN: Eric. 

21 MR. FITZ: Say that again. Why 

22 they're -- 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 156

1 MR. McHUGH: Strip curtains are a 

2 part of the prescriptive requirements in EISA. 

3 So why are they listed here as an efficiency 

4 level since they're already required by the 

5 standard? 

6 MS. LEGETT: Maybe we can -- Is 

7 there a copy of EISA handy that we can read 

8 from? 

9 MR. MINELLI: The EISA standard, 

10 there is a clarification on the DOE website. 

11 The EISA standard does not require strip 

12 curtains on self-closing doors meaning 

13 everything 3.9 X 6.9. 

14 MR. BROOKMAN: Did you get that? 

15 Did you get Fred on the -- Repeat it, Fred. 

16 MR. MINELLI: There's a 

17 clarification on the DOE website that was 

18 early in '09 that states that as long as the 

19 doors are self-closing they do not require 

20 strip curtains. So there are no strip 

21 curtains on small doors as a requirement in 

22 EISA. So that is not a basis. 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 157

1 MS. LEGETT: I wanted to check 

2 EISA because it doesn't say you must have 

3 strip curtains and only strip curtains. There 

4 are multiple things. 

5 MR. McHUGH: It says infiltration 

6 barriers. 

7 MS. LEGETT: Right. This would be 

8 strip curtains in addition to whatever else 

9 EISA requires. 

10 MR. BROOKMAN: Okay. 

11 MR. MINELLI: And they're 

12 considering spring loaded hinges to take the 

13 place of strip curtains. 

14 MR. BROOKMAN: Thanks for that 

15 clarification. 

16 MR. LLENZA: Charles Llenza, the 

17 Department of Energy. I think the fact that 

18 EISA doesn't exactly tell you which particular 

19 type of either strip curtain or spring loaded 

20 door or some kind of other infiltration 

21 barrier that's why we list it as an option. 

22 It's not really an option in that sense. But 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 158

1 it's a combination of technology mixes that 

2 you would use to get to the energy efficiency 

3 levels in order of describing the daily energy 

4 consumption. 

5 MR. BROOKMAN: Joanna. 

6 MS. MAUER: Joanna Mauer. So is 

7 there a specific assumption about which 

8 technology is being used in the baseline for 

9 infiltration reduction? 

10 MS. LEGETT: I believe so. 

11 MR. FITZ: Yes. The baselines, 

12 DOE's attempt to represent what is the least 

13 efficient that is typically sold in the market 

14 today. So DOE found that in most cases strip 

15 curtains are not included. That's one 

16 technology that's not part of the baseline. 

17 But there are numerous other assumptions. 

18 MS. MAUER: Joanna Mauer. Can you 

19 -- Is there a specific assumption about what 

20 is included in the baseline? 

21 MR. FITZ: Yes, and it's outlined 

22 in the chapter. There are dozens of 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 159

1 assumptions about the baseline. 

2 MR. BROOKMAN: Please your name. 

3 MR. FITZ: Of what is included. 

4 MS. MAUER: Just specifically for 

5 the infiltration reduction in the door I guess 

6 is what I'm asking. But I can look. 

7 MR. FITZ: Yes. 

8 MR. BROOKMAN: Thank you, Eric. 

9 Please. 

10 MR. OWEN: Kenny Owen with Master11 Bilt. I just want to reinforce what Charlie 

12 is saying here. If you look at the graph to 

13 think that we could go that far and save half 

14 the energy with something that costs almost 

15 nothing, it doesn't pass the smell test. I 

16 mean if that was true, we would all be touting 

17 that, whatever that is, strip curtains, and 

18 selling it as a big energy saver right now. 

19 And that's just not realistic. So I think we 

20 definitely need to do some work there. 

21 MR. BROOKMAN: Once again, the 

22 Department would really appreciate the 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 160

1 experience of manufacturers on this subject, 

2 what they have found. 

3 Are we ready to -- 

4 MS. LEGETT: If there are no 

5 further questions on the envelope, we'll move 

6 on to refrigeration. And here I realize that 

7 this might be pretty contentious. So I'll 

8 explain it very briefly and then let people 

9 comment. 

10 The graph looks different from the 

11 previous graph and one of the reasons for this 

12 is that refrigeration systems were analyzed 

13 somewhat differently from envelopes. If you 

14 look at the axis here, on the previous slide, 

15 it was manufacturer selling price and daily 

16 energy consumption. You'll notice on the 

17 refrigeration it's normalized manufacturer 

18 selling price and normalized daily energy 

19 consumption. 

20 The reason for this was that for 

21 refrigeration systems some of the design 

22 options increase the capacity of the system. 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 161

1 So an increase in the manufacturer price could 

2 be attributed to either a gain in efficiency 

3 or a gain in capacity. So to account for 

4 this, DOE divided both the cost and the energy 

5 consumption by the net capacity. And that's 

6 why the axes say normalized here. 

7 What we found in our preliminary 

8 results was that for the first two efficiency 

9 levels, these first two points after the 

10 baseline, which actually correspond to 

11 increased larger evaporator and condenser coil 

12 respectively, in absolute terms they cost 

13 more. But it also adds capacity. So the cost 

14 per capacity goes down. And the energy 

15 consumption per capacity goes down. That's 

16 why we see this dip in the graph here. 

17 And I'll go ahead and let people 

18 comment on that. 

19 MR. BROOKMAN: Daryl. 

20 MR. ERBS: So let me just give you 

21 the smell test on this. If I go across to the 

22 left to get back to where I was on cost, 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 162

1 normalized selling price, I'm basically at 

2 half the energy consumption that I started at 

3 the same selling price. You know if we look 

4 at the history of unitary air conditioners it 

5 would be like going from a SEER of eight which 

6 is I think where we started if my memory 

7 serves me to 16 which is probably where you 

8 guys are going next on unitary for no added 

9 cost to the system. 

10 And I'd ask you to go look at the 

11 history on air conditioning. Did they get 

12 from eight to 13 without adding cost let alone 

13 16? And I think the answer is no. 

14 Now it could be that refrigeration 

15 manufacturers are way behind and we've got a 

16 lot more low hanging fruit and there's 

17 probably some truth to that. 

18 MR. BROOKMAN: It seems like the 

19 Department has counted on you being more 

20 brilliant yet. 

21 MR. ERBS: This to me is -- Boy, 

22 we've been leaving a lot of money on the table 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 163

1 for a long time. And that's why I'm asking 

2 you about did you include sheet metal and did 

3 you consider the fact that a smaller 

4 compressor which is part of where you get to 

5 on this may not cost as much less as a 

6 reduction in its size. So if I use as half a 

7 large of a compressor it may not cost half as 

8 much. You know, some things like that I think 

9 might be part of why I'm just uncomfortable 

10 looking at this curve and thinking we can 

11 really get there. 

12 MS. LEGETT: Yes. This is why 

13 we're asking for comment on this because there 

14 were a lot of assumptions that went into this. 

15 One was exactly what you just said, the cost 

16 of different tech options like the cost of 

17 compressors. Can you provide costs of more 

18 efficient compressors that are different from 

19 the costs that we actually have in the TSD? 

20 And if you can, that would be a good basis for 

21 us reevaluating. 

22 MR. ERBS: I'm not sure we can -- 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 164

1 I mean you really need to get a broad view of 

2 the whole industry and all the different 

3 sizes. And can we all do that by the 28th of 

4 May? I'm not sure. 

5 MS. LEGETT: Okay. 

6 MR. ERBS: I think we can give you 

7 comments to say we're not convinced that this 

8 is entirely accurate and tell you when maybe 

9 we can give you some data and see if that 

10 works for you. 

11 MS. LEGETT: Okay. 

12 MR. BROOKMAN: Warren, go ahead. 

13 MR. BEETON: Warren Beeton again. 

14 Another way to look at this, does this mean 

15 that your curve implies that if you put -- 

16 You've got an example somewhere there that we 

17 ought to look at which is you've increased the 

18 efficiency which also brought along some 

19 additional capacity. But never in my 

20 experience has the capacity increase been so 

21 large. It's usually a small effect that to 

22 offset that capacity, to keep the capacity the 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 165

1 same, you can put in a smaller component, a 

2 smaller compressor, but that savings is -- 

3 I've never seen a case where it isn't 

4 minuscule compared to the cost at or for the 

5 efficiency increase. 

6 So I think it would be instructive 

7 to look at your examples specifically to try 

8 to find out how you got to those numbers. 

9 That might be a more productive way than us 

10 just giving a bunch of data. 

11 MS. LEGETT: Okay. Thank you. 

12 MR. ERBS: And that's why I was 

13 asking. I mean you told us how much the 

14 larger condenser costs. You haven't told us 

15 how you took a bunch of money out elsewhere to 

16 get to that lower net cost per increment of 

17 capacity. And again we could work on it and I 

18 understand you might not be able to share all 

19 of the detail, but just maybe some relative 

20 information would help us respond more 

21 effectively. 

22 MR. LLENZA: This is Charles 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 166

1 Llenza of the Department of Energy. I think 

2 what we can do is as we revise the TSD from 

3 this meeting so that we could try to provide a 

4 little bit more information in terms of how we 

5 got to the different points, the different 

6 analysis. 

7 MR. BROOKMAN: Aris. 

8 DR. MARANTAN: Aris Marantan. I 

9 just want to also mention that to follow up on 

10 your comment, Daryl, about the 28th. 

11 Obviously, that is when the comment period 

12 ends for this proceeding. But we do have an 

13 opportunity coming up after the preliminary 

14 stage. In fact, it starts after the 28th 

15 after the comment period closes. 

16 You'll hear in a couple of slides 

17 later on or this afternoon that we'll be 

18 conducting the manufacturer impact analysis. 

19 That's primarily for financial information 

20 needed for the MIA. But we also take that 

21 opportunity to get into a little more detail 

22 about the analyses we've conducted for this 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 167

1 stage so we can update it for the NOPR. 

2 So you'll hear this afternoon that 

3 we'll be happy to come out and visit 

4 manufacturers like we did. I believe it was 

5 last year. And we'll be happy to talk to you 

6 about specific assumptions we've made in the 

7 analysis. We can provide you a lot more 

8 detail because we set up non-disclosure 

9 agreements with companies. 

10 MR. LLENZA: This is Charles 

11 Llenza of the Department of Energy also. Just 

12 a clarification here in terms of the process. 

13 We have formal deadlines for these comments 

14 to be submitted. But the Department doesn't -

15 - I mean if you send us comments in a month 

16 and you have specific details that you have 

17 fleshed out, the Department would not put that 

18 aside and ignore it. It's not beneficial to 

19 anybody. 

20 And this process also is not 

21 regimented in such a level that we just stop 

22 listening at certain periods of time. All the 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 168

1 way through to the NOPR, up to the NOPR 

2 process, we are constantly revising our 

3 analysis and our methodologies, etc., in terms 

4 of getting to the next level which is the 

5 notice of proposed rulemaking. 

6 In terms of the formality of the 

7 deadline, I would not be discouraged by the 

8 formality of the deadline for submitting 

9 comments to the Department as discouraging you 

10 from submitting comments after the comment 

11 period closes. 

12 MR. BROOKMAN: Karim first. 

13 DR. AMRANE: Again, just a quick 

14 question. Karim Amrane, AHRI. Are the 

15 details of those tables available in the TSD? 

16 MS. LEGETT: I'm sorry. What was 

17 that first part? 

18 DR. AMRANE: The details, the 

19 analysis that was used to derive those numbers 

20 in the chapter or whatever, chapter five? 

21 MS. LEGETT: What Charlie just 

22 said to the extent that the TSD lacks certain 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 169

1 details that you would like, we can look into 

2 revising the TSD to add those. 

3 DR. AMRANE: I guess as far as to 

4 be able to provide this kind of input we will 

5 have to know how you are deriving those 

6 numbers. 

7 MS. LEGETT: Okay. Do you have a 

8 particular number that -- 

9 DR. AMRANE: Yes. We are 

10 questioning the curve here and as well as to 

11 understand how you ended up having this curve, 

12 we need to understand the details that went 

13 into deriving the curve. 

14 MS. LEGETT: Thank you. 

15 MR. BROOKMAN: Charlie. 

16 MR. STEPHENS: Charlie Stephens. 

17 I did just look up EISA 2007 Section 312 just 

18 to read it through for myself to make sure I 

19 was reading it correctly and my reading of 

20 that section on infiltration control suggest 

21 that they do require some means. It's not 

22 strip curtains per se, but there's some means 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 170

1 of controlling infiltration when the door is 

2 open which suggests that the entire 

3 infiltration load from door openings is not 

4 available at this point in this proceeding to 

5 reduce but rather some fraction of that if you 

6 can come up with a means that's more effective 

7 than what's specified in EISA today. 

8 There are several options 

9 specified there, spring hinge doors, strip 

10 curtains, etc., and those don't have zero 

11 effectiveness. I think we've heard that they 

12 may not be 90 percent either. But they don't 

13 have zero effectiveness. And I think there's 

14 probably a substantial amount of infiltration 

15 there left to work on you might say with this 

16 rulemaking. So just from my reading of the 

17 statute suggests that. 

18 MR. BROOKMAN: Thanks, Charlie. 

19 Jon. 

20 MR. McHUGH: So I think it would 

21 be helpful if -- It might be already in the 

22 spreadsheets--- but the non-normalized values 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 171

1 for this. So what is -- I'm assuming that 

2 showing the non-normalized values doesn't 

3 violate any proprietary information. That 

4 would be helpful to help understand what's 

5 going on here. Thanks. 

6 MS. LEGETT: Thank you. 

7 MR. BROOKMAN: Are we ready to 

8 move on now? 

9 MR. McHUGH: One more comment. 

10 MR. BROOKMAN: Yes. 

11 MR. McHUGH: These meetings are -- 

12 There's a lot of information to cover and 

13 there's a lot of really deep technical detail 

14 to understand why potentially our R-value 

15 evaluations of the measures are substantially 

16 different from Department's. I was wondering. 

17 Is there any method of sort of meeting 

18 directly with the people that are involved in 

19 developing these numbers so that there's some 

20 kind of dialogue that's at a much more sort of 

21 esoteric level than the discussions that we 

22 have here? 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 172

1 (Off the record comment.) 

2 I'm suggesting for non 

3 manufacturers by the way. So I'm not a 

4 manufacturer and I don't represent 

5 manufacturers. 

6 (Off the record comments.) 

7 MR. LLENZA: This is Charlie 

8 Llenza here. I think that in the interest of 

9 everybody's time that instead of coming in one 

10 party at a time that if there was a little bit 

11 of a consensus on certain particular issues 

12 that you wanted to discuss on the analysis 

13 that we would entertain parties coming to the 

14 Department to talk to the analysis team to 

15 help us clarify or further define our 

16 analysis. 

17 I would just recommend that we do 

18 this at an early stage, an early summer stage, 

19 rather than a later because we have to do a 

20 lot of number crunching and there's other 

21 steps for this rulemaking. This is not the 

22 only thing we're doing here. 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 173

1 (Off the record comment.) 

2 I would see what we need to do. I 

3 don't think it's -- I'm not opposed. I don't 

4 think the Department would be opposed to 

5 having an interaction with the industry or the 

6 stakeholders or whichever particular group. I 

7 think we just need to get a little bit 

8 organized so we're using the time most 

9 efficient. 

10 There are some issues. There are 

11 clearly some issues in terms of how we got to 

12 these numbers. We see it differently because 

13 we're not experts, of course. We're trying to 

14 become the experts. But we could certainly 

15 benefit from a meeting that's organized in 

16 terms of and couched around some kind of 

17 agenda in terms of specifics. 

18 MR. BROOKMAN: Betsy Kohl. 

19 MS. KOHL: Hi. This is Betsy 

20 Kohl, DOE. I just wanted to say the 

21 manufacturer interview when you're gathering 

22 technical details are different. But we don't 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 174

1 want to create the impression of one-on-one 

2 meetings. So if those meetings do take place, 

3 there is documentation so that everybody knows 

4 what's being talked about. 

5 MR. McHUGH: Jon McHugh. What I'd 

6 recommend is there's the ASHRAE summer 

7 meeting. It's the end of June. Most 

8 manufacturers or many of the utilities are 

9 also at that meeting. That would be a perfect 

10 place to have a public forum to discuss these 

11 things. 

12 MR. BROOKMAN: To go into much 

13 greater detail. 

14 MR. McHUGH: That's right. A 

15 detailed discussion of the modeling aspects 

16 and the energy. 

17 MR. BROOKMAN: So to facilitate 

18 that happening I would guess that those of you 

19 that would be interested in taking that deep 

20 dive that you would need to describe the 

21 elements for which you'd like to go into 

22 considerable detail. 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 175

1 MR. McHUGH: Correct. Yes. 

2 MR. BROOKMAN: Okay. Thank you. 

3 Harmon. 

4 MR. LEWIS: One other thing on 

5 this. The fact that you get more output on a 

6 unit is not necessarily a bonus because the 

7 refrigeration system has to balance the heat 

8 load need of a walk-in so that the walk-in can 

9 control the humidity as well as the 

10 temperature. So if you can come up -- If this 

11 one improves, you know, you take a 20,000 BTU 

12 unit and you make it 30,000 I can't use it on 

13 a 20,000 BTU walk-in that we started out at 

14 the baseline. So bigger isn't better all the 

15 time. 

16 Now a lower cost 20,000 BTU, 

17 that's what you need but not a lower cost 

18 30,000 that won't work on a 20,000. 

19 MR. BROOKMAN: Let's proceed. 

20 MS. LEGETT: Thank you. If there 

21 are no further comments on this graph, this is 

22 actually the last slide in the section and 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 176

1 this is to describe how this engineering 

2 analysis feeds into the downstream analyses. 

3 So here you see this chart again and each of 

4 these points corresponded to a particular 

5 design option. 

6 But now we are going to call each 

7 point an efficiency level. And for downstream 

8 analyses, DOE conducted these analyses at each 

9 combination of efficiency levels for envelope 

10 and refrigeration system pairs. And we're 

11 going to get into details of how those were 

12 matched and how the energy consumption was 

13 calculated in further analyses. 

14 So that's the end of that section. 

15 MR. BROOKMAN: Comments on that? 

16 (No verbal response.) 

17 I was just consulting with 

18 Charles. I think maybe we should take lunch 

19 now. It's now 12:15 a.m. and we have -- We're 

20 behind schedule maybe as much as 45 minutes. 

21 But I do think we'll catch it up toward the 

22 end of the day. 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 177

1 So let's take lunch now. It's 

2 12:15 p.m. We'll resume here at 1:15 p.m. I 

3 think the discussion has been very, very 

4 useful and very fruitful and I appreciate 

5 everybody just talking about the stuff that 

6 matters to them. 

7 Make sure you wear your badge in 

8 the building. This room will be locked. So 

9 you can leave your stuff here. For those of 

10 you that are unfamiliar with Forrestal to get 

11 to the big cafeteria you go down to the ground 

12 floor and you go about a 100 yards that way 

13 (Indicating) and then up the escalator to the 

14 cafeteria. 

15 You'll have to pass through 

16 security light to get back in. They might -- 

17 You might need to have your ID although it's 

18 been hit or miss whether they require that or 

19 not to get back in. So enjoy your lunch and 

20 we'll resume at 1:15 p.m. Off the record. 

21 (Whereupon, at 12:15 p.m., the 

22 above-entitled matter recessed to reconvene at 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 178

1 1:15 p.m. the same day.) 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 A-F-T-E-R-N-O-O-N S-E-S-S-I-O-N 

21 1:20 p.m. 

22 MR. BROOKMAN: Let's start back 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 179

1 up. Please take your seats. 

2 A housekeeping note that I forgot 

3 this morning, the Department will make a 

4 photocopy of the business cards that you all 

5 handed over this morning. And if you haven't 

6 done so already, you might still be able to 

7 get your card in the basket to Brenda. So 

8 there will be a visual copy of all those that 

9 have attended, that registered, as a courtesy. 

10 So we're going to then proceed as 

11 we had planned with the agenda. 

12 Gopal? 

13 DR. BANDYOPADHYAY: This is Gopal 

14 Bandyopadhyay. And I'm from Pacific Northwest 

15 National Lab. And in this section of the 

16 presentation, we will briefly describe two 

17 very key steps in the whole analysis process. 

18 First we will explain the 

19 methodology which DOE used to determine the 

20 end-user price of the equipment by a process 

21 called a markup analysis. And later we will 

22 move to energy analysis, the DOE's process of 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 180

1 estimating the annual energy consumption for a 

2 combination of the box and a refrigeration 

3 system together. 

4 So first we have the -- okay, when 

5 we first start with the markup analysis 

6 process, we had to really figure out what the 

7 price of the whole equipment is, the 

8 equipment, walk-in coolers and freezer boxes 

9 to the final customer. And for that, we had 

10 to also know at various efficiency levels. 

11 So from the engineering analysis 

12 that we obtained, the manufacturer's sales 

13 price, which was explained by Rebecca in 

14 detail what it consists of. And sometimes the 

15 boxes move through the distribution channel 

16 operators, they add their own markup. 

17 So the first step in this process 

18 is to map and characterize the distribution 

19 channels. And then, of course, we have to 

20 figure out the costs which are involved and 

21 how much is the markup percentage of the base 

22 channel. 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 181

1 The way this is done is that we 

2 use actual public domain data. There are two 

3 associations. One is ACCA. Of course, ACCA 

4 is the contractors association. But we have 

5 got HARDI, H-A-R-D-I, that is Heating, Air6 Conditioning, and Refrigeration Distributors 

7 International. They represent really the 

8 dealers. 

9 And they periodically collect data 

10 from their members and they create the balance 

11 sheets. And this is called the periodic 

12 profit report. And we have used this periodic 

13 profit report data to determine the markups, 

14 which covers both the baseline markups and 

15 also the incremental markups. 

16 The baseline markups is a markup 

17 percentage, what is applicable today in the 

18 market. And incremental markup refers to like 

19 a situation when suppose there is energy 

20 conservation -- energy saving measures 

21 implemented in the equipment and we have 

22 additional costs which are incurred. 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 182

1 Then, of course, the baseline 

2 markup percentage is not applicable. The 

3 markup percentage goes up a fractional amount 

4 of what the total is. So this is called the 

5 incremental markup and we will explain that 

6 with an example. 

7 So this is DOE's impression of the 

8 distribution channels for equipment for the 

9 grocery and the large supermarket segment. 

10 And to our left, we have the national 

11 accounts. But that is actually the national 

12 accounts are the large chain stores. In fact 

13 they negotiate and transact business directly 

14 with the manufacturers. 

15 And, of course, in addition to 

16 that, we have the three other distribution 

17 intermediaries who have significant roles. 

18 When we talk about the small, independent 

19 chains and also the chains with few stores, 

20 those kind of businesses. So they have 

21 essentially procured their equipment through 

22 one of those intermediaries. 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 183

1 We have at the highest level the 

2 equipment dealer. And, of course, below him 

3 we have got a mechanical contractor. 

4 Sometimes the distribution intermediary, the 

5 equipment dealer, and the mechanical 

6 contractor can be one and the same person. 

7 But, of course, sometimes we see situations 

8 where the mechanical contractor is an 

9 independent entity and he has really no role 

10 in the distribution of the equipment. 

11 And in addition to that, a small 

12 percentage of the business, what DOE has seen, 

13 is also done by the food and equipment 

14 wholesalers who kind of -- they kind of do 

15 both. They also sell and distribute food and 

16 also distribute the equipment. 

17 So from here we move on to the 

18 DOE's impression about the distribution 

19 channels for equipment to food service 

20 segment. Food service segment is acquiring 

21 different kinds of things where you have our 

22 standard models. And there are distributors 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 184

1 that DOE has identified. 

2 Dealers are the usual dealers what 

3 we described earlier and then you have got 

4 some portion of the business, we believe is 

5 done by what we call E-Commerce resellers, 

6 people who can have their warehouse anywhere 

7 but they sell primarily through their website. 

8 And we have got what we call broad 

9 line distributors which, again, are the 

10 people, the integrated distributors who sell 

11 both food and the equipment. And they feed 

12 into the operators who are really the owners, 

13 the mom and pop stores, or the big chains, or 

14 who does this food service business. 

15 And what we have seen also, what 

16 DOE has seen also is that there are other 

17 important players in this whole value chain 

18 like we have the buying groups -- associations 

19 of dealers who negotiate the business directly 

20 with the manufacturer. I mean they have an 

21 important role. 

22 And the design consultants and the 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 185

1 franchisers who also decide on the equipment 

2 specifications. And they also even determine 

3 the particular manufacturer. They also have 

4 got a role to play. 

5 So this is all the structure of 

6 DOE's impression of the market for the food 

7 service segment. 

8 MR. BROOKMAN: Gopal, hang on just 

9 one moment. So before we move off these two 

10 slides, questions and comments before we go 

11 into greater detail surrounding what is 

12 represented here. 

13 DR. BANDYOPADHYAY: Yes, okay. 

14 MR. BROOKMAN: Just briefly, just 

15 to answer any questions on these two. 

16 Yes, Mike? 

17 MR. STRAUB: Mike Straub, 

18 Heatcraft. 

19 The walk-in cooler freezer 

20 manufacturers, is that the envelope 

21 manufacturer or the system manufacturer? Or 

22 is it the aggregate? 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 186

1 DR. BANDYOPADHYAY: Walk-in 

2 coolers manufacturers, we would -- of course, 

3 system manufacturers are included there but we 

4 would also include the manufacturers of the 

5 envelopes. 

6 MR. STRAUB: Okay. Because the 

7 system manufacturers actually sell to the box 

8 manufacturers as well. That's another step. 

9 DR. BANDYOPADHYAY: In the 

10 refrigeration systems? 

11 MR. STRAUB: Right. 

12 DR. BANDYOPADHYAY: All 

13 refrigeration systems manufacturers, they are 

14 kind of very large enterprises. And they have 

15 got various market segments. I think the 

16 answer to your would be we are considering 

17 only that portion of the refrigeration system 

18 manufacturers only for the segments for the 

19 walk-in coolers because they might be selling 

20 also to other intermediaries. 

21 MR. STRAUB: I guess what I'm 

22 getting at is if this is the envelope, then 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 187

1 there is one more distribution step where the 

2 system manufacturers sell to the envelope 

3 manufacturers who sell into all of these 

4 groups because about half of our business goes 

5 through OEM box manufacturers. 

6 DR. BANDYOPADHYAY: Yes. 

7 MR. STRAUB: The other half goes 

8 through the other distribution channels you're 

9 showing here. 

10 DR. BANDYOPADHYAY: Yes. 

11 MR. STRAUB: So there's one more 

12 step in this process. 

13 DR. BANDYOPADHYAY: Yes, okay. I 

14 think for the refrigeration system, we would 

15 consider that as an input cost for the 

16 envelope manufacturers, the system integrators 

17 primarily. So I think that step we have not 

18 really included it. 

19 I'm sure your comment is well 

20 appreciated. We'll see how this could be 

21 modified. 

22 MR. BROOKMAN: Thank you. That's 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 188

1 the reason we paused here for this. 

2 Yes? Harmon? 

3 MR. LEWIS: Also on this, the 

4 design consultants really aren't between the 

5 dealer and the operator. Going down that 

6 arrow is really the operators are telling the 

7 consultants what products they're interested. 

8 It's then specified and then that 

9 arrow really comes back to the walk-in cooler 

10 and freezer manufacturer for the equipment 

11 we're providing. But the consultant does not 

12 buy from the dealer and sell to the operator. 

13 DR. BANDYOPADHYAY: No, they 

14 don't. In this slide, that is why it shown in 

15 a different kind of box. As you can notice, 

16 the people who are really trading in those 

17 goods, they are in a different color 

18 rectangular box. And these have got some 

19 other roles. 

20 I mean just to explain the whole 

21 process but they really don't have any 

22 implications in the value chain. 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 189

1 MR. BROOKMAN: That's a good 

2 comment, a useful comment. 

3 Other thoughts on these graphic 

4 representations of the distribution channels? 

5 Did -- I thought I saw someone else. No? 

6 Okay. Everybody's comfortable with this 

7 before we get into more detail? 

8 (No response.) 

9 MR. BROOKMAN: Okay. 

10 DR. BANDYOPADHYAY: Thank you. 

11 Okay. DOE estimated that the 

12 market could be quite different for the 

13 multiplex condensing equipment because it goes 

14 to, primarily, to the supermarkets and the 

15 grocery segments. So we have these pie charts 

16 which would show the share -- the estimates of 

17 the shares of the various distribution 

18 channels. 

19 And for multiplex condensing 

20 equipment, we believe -- DOE believes that the 

21 large portion of that is moving through the 

22 national accounts. And the rest of the market 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 190

1 is shared equally between the distributor and 

2 the contractor. 

3 And for the dedicated condensing 

4 equipment, the whole market is split between 

5 these two subsegments. We have the 

6 convenience store and the small grocery stores 

7 that account for half of the market. And for 

8 the food service, the rest half is accounted 

9 for by the food service. 

10 And so, again, from the pie chart, 

11 we can see that for convenience stores, 

12 grocery stores, the market is roughly split 

13 three ways. But for the food service segment, 

14 the dealers have a large role, 80 percent of 

15 the market moves through the dealer. The rest 

16 is shared between the e-commerce resellers and 

17 the contractors. 

18 So DOE has not hard data to really 

19 back it up but DOE has discussions with a few 

20 manufacturers and also the feedback which DOE 

21 got during the framework meeting, all this was 

22 kind of aggregated and this is what DOE thinks 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 191

1 is the market picture. 

2 So now DOE is inviting comments on 

3 these two issues. We have first whether it is 

4 okay to state these distribution channels 

5 depending on the market segment, issue number 

6 one. 

7 And the second issue is that 

8 whether -- about the accuracy and the 

9 completeness of the distribution channels and 

10 the channel shares. 

11 MR. BROOKMAN: So we've had good 

12 comment on this already. Additional comments 

13 particularly on the shares? Yes, Harmon? 

14 MR. LEWIS: I'm not sure if this 

15 is the right spot but in your Chapter 5, you 

16 show that -- or state that you've figured 

17 there were 288,000 refrigeration equipment 

18 shipped in Table 3.2.8 and only 102,000 walk19 in envelopes each year. 

20 And it seems like that, you know, 

21 almost three refrigeration systems to each 

22 walk-in. 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 192

1 DR. BANDYOPADHYAY: Yes. 

2 MR. LEWIS: I know there's 

3 replacements but it seems very high. And then 

4 even more off track is ten multiplex systems 

5 to every one dedicated system. And within our 

6 realm, I don't see that and I don't think some 

7 of the refrigeration manufacturers themselves 

8 see that. So I'm wondering where that data 

9 originated. 

10 MR. BROOKMAN: How would you 

11 correct it? What would you -- how would you 

12 recharacterize it? 

13 MR. LEWIS: Well, I'd like to 

14 understand where it is. I can't tell you how 

15 they made the bomb. I can just tell you it 

16 went off. 

17 (Laughter.) 

18 MR. BROOKMAN: Go ahead, yes, 

19 please. Please say your name. Turn in on, 

20 there you go. 

21 MR. McCORMICK: Thank you. Gavin 

22 McCormick, Pacific Northwest National Lab. 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 193

1 I just thought we should reserve 

2 that for the shipments chapter. We have an 

3 entire section on that later. So -- but we do 

4 welcome the comment in just a little bit. 

5 MR. LEWIS: I mean and that's 

6 going to address where your numbers came from? 

7 MR. McCORMICK: We'll provide the 

8 best we can and talk about it then I think is 

9 the best answer. 

10 MR. BROOKMAN: Okay. So when we 

11 get there, yes. 

12 Can anybody comment just globally 

13 on how the Department has characterized these 

14 shares? Are they in the right ballpark here? 

15 What would you say about it, Harmon? 

16 MR. LEWIS: I don't want to be the 

17 only one that talks but I think it is fairly 

18 accurate. And until the last couple years 

19 within the food service distribution there, 

20 you'd have national accounts such as major 

21 chains. But in the last couple of years, 

22 they've kind of quit building as the economy 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 194

1 went in the tank. 

2 So this is probably accurate for 

3 now. Hopefully in the next couple years, 

4 they'll bounce back. And they'd probably be 

5 part of that 20 percent might be between the 

6 non-dealer would probably be split three equal 

7 ways rather than the two you now show just 

8 from my experience. 

9 DR. BANDYOPADHYAY: Thank you. 

10 MR. BROOKMAN: Good. Thank you. 

11 Yes, Daryl? 

12 MR. ERBS: Daryl Erbs. My only 

13 other comment would be I'm surprised to see 

14 ten percent going through e-commerce. That 

15 seems high to me. It's gaining but I don't 

16 think it is at ten percent. 

17 DR. BANDYOPADHYAY: Yes. This is 

18 just an estimate. So we really don't have a 

19 real feel for that number. I mean this is a 

20 totally ballpark figure. So -- 

21 MR. ERBS: And my other comment 

22 would be a lot of times e-commerce consists of 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 195

1 one of our dealers selling it into someone 

2 else's territory. And we can still look at 

3 that as a distributor sale. 

4 MR. BROOKMAN: Yes. Harmon, you 

5 used your hands to flash up a numeral. Yes. 

6 You think it is how much? 

7 MR. LEWIS: I think e-commerce is 

8 probably two percent in its strictest sense. 

9 If somebody put something -- if somebody shows 

10 something on the internet and sells it, there 

11 are a few dealers, Restaurant Equipment World 

12 in Orlando and such, but I think at least 

13 within our base of what we manufacture, it's 

14 two percent or less. I don't know what other 

15 people are seeing but it is typically still 

16 through the food service equipment dealer 

17 almost -- 

18 MR. BROOKMAN: Thank you. Okay. 

19 Thanks. 

20 DR. BANDYOPADHYAY: Well, I think 

21 I'll respond to that. It is primarily a 

22 visibility effect because the moment you 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 196

1 search for food service equipment, they show 

2 up so you tend to feel that it is high. 

3 But I think we really appreciate 

4 your comments and we will modify our figure. 

5 MR. BROOKMAN: Final comments on 

6 these chains and shares? 

7 (No response.) 

8 MR. BROOKMAN: Okay. 

9 DR. BANDYOPADHYAY: Thank you. 

10 So these are the results DOE 

11 obtained from the markup analysis. Figures in 

12 the -- I don't know what is the color -- call 

13 it now green is actually the baseline markup 

14 multipliers and the figures in the blue are 

15 the incremental markup multipliers. 

16 Now to explain what it is, is that 

17 let's follow the figure in the first column 

18 under the distributor heading. And the first 

19 figure which appears in green is 1.45. That 

20 really means that the markup multiplier is 

21 1.45, which means that the distributor is 

22 adding 45 percent markup on the manufacturer's 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 197

1 selling price for his price to the final 

2 customer. 

3 And the figure next to that in 

4 blue that is 1.12, that implies that they are 

5 adding -- I mean they're not adding really -- 

6 I mean they might add twelve percent more when 

7 you have a higher efficiency equipment or the 

8 equipment which costs a bit more because it 

9 has energy-saving features. 

10 So this incremental analysis is 

11 very important. I mean this is standard 

12 procedure that the DOE has used for all other 

13 rulemaking processes. 

14 So we have the figures, various 

15 figures under various distributor types. And 

16 all these figures are aggregated to find out 

17 the overall markup multiplier which is used in 

18 the downstream calculations. 

19 So the figures which you see here 

20 in the second row, the first row is multiplied 

21 by a universal sales tax multiplier, 1.07, 

22 which means that there is seven percent sales 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 198

1 tax. That is kind of a national average. 

2 So DOE has studied the sales rates 

3 for all the states and found out what could be 

4 considered as a national average. So that 

5 figure gets multiplied by the first row figure 

6 to the overall markup percentage. 

7 So DOE seeks comments on these 

8 values, whether they look high, or they look 

9 low, or they look reasonable, or they are just 

10 right. 

11 MR. BROOKMAN: Go ahead, Harmon. 

12 MR. LEWIS: I didn't follow the 

13 math to get to the overall weighted average 

14 markup from the first three columns. Can you 

15 explain how those became like 1.41 and 1.83 

16 from the other three numbers like the top row? 

17 DR. BANDYOPADHYAY: The top row 

18 figures are multiplied by 1.07 only to get the 

19 second row figures like 1.45 multiplied by 

20 1.07, that's 1.56. 

21 MR. BROOKMAN: He's talking about 

22 going across. 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 199

1 MR. LEWIS: Yes, up in the top row 

2 there, you've got the three yellow numbers on 

3 the left. 

4 DR. BANDYOPADHYAY: Oh, okay. I'm 

5 sorry. Yes, sorry. I misunderstood. 

6 MR. LEWIS: All right. How did 

7 those become the 1.41 for multiplex? 

8 DR. BANDYOPADHYAY: Yes. 

9 MR. LEWIS: And how do they become 

10 the 1.83? 

11 DR. BANDYOPADHYAY: Exactly. 

12 MR. LEWIS: What's that? 

13 DR. BANDYOPADHYAY: Yes. The 

14 process involved here is that we have to refer 

15 back to the pie chart, which showed that for 

16 multiplex equipment, we had various 

17 percentages assigned to the various three 

18 types of distribution channels. So those are 

19 the weighting factors which are used to derive 

20 this 1.41 figure. 

21 MR. LEWIS: Okay. 

22 MR. BROOKMAN: So, yes, David 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 200

1 Winiarski? 

2 MR. WINIARSKI: Hi, David 

3 Winiarski from Pacific Northwest Laboratory. 

4 I wanted to emphasize a point here 

5 for the team's benefit. These markups are 

6 applied to the costs from the engineering 

7 analysis as you're walking through the chain. 

8 So to the extent that shipping 

9 costs are included in the engineering costs, 

10 they will be marked up. So we heard earlier 

11 that some of the shipping costs may be borne 

12 at the customer side, so if you have data on 

13 shipping costs and you can disaggregate by 

14 similar distribution channels, that would be 

15 very useful for the team. 

16 MR. BROOKMAN: Okay. Thank you. 

17 We're still waiting to hear, I 

18 believe, if the numbers here in Chart 51, 

19 these markups, if you think they are on target 

20 or if you could suggest how to make them 

21 better. 

22 No comments? Harmon, start with 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 201

1 us, yes? 

2 MR. LEWIS: Again, the obvious is 

3 none of us are those people. So I don't know 

4 what my customers sell it for. I would think 

5 the average dealer markup that I'm familiar 

6 with is probably ten to 12 percent, you know, 

7 not 80 percent. 

8 So I just know that the dealers 

9 are in great competition with each other. If 

10 they've got a job that nobody else is bidding 

11 on, they can do anything. But most everything 

12 else is, you know, in this economy ten people 

13 bidding the same job at the dealer level, and 

14 they're taking jobs at five percent -- 

15 MR. BROOKMAN: Okay. That's 

16 helpful. 

17 MR. LEWIS: -- above our costs. 

18 So -- 

19 MR. BROOKMAN: Thank you. 

20 MR. LEWIS: -- I think they're 

21 high. 

22 DR. BANDYOPADHYAY: Yes, thank 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 202

1 you, yes. 

2 MR. BROOKMAN: Okay. 

3 DR. BANDYOPADHYAY: I mean these 

4 are based on secondary data so we'll examine 

5 your observation and whether we get any 

6 evidence of that. 

7 MR. BROOKMAN: I was wondering how 

8 old is your data? 

9 DR. BANDYOPADHYAY: This, from the 

10 2008. 

11 MR. BROOKMAN: Okay. 

12 DR. BANDYOPADHYAY: Yes. For 

13 HARDI, that is the 2008 profit report that we 

14 have used. 

15 MR. BROOKMAN: Okay. Final 

16 comments on these markups? These markup 

17 numbers? 

18 DR. BANDYOPADHYAY: Okay. Thank 

19 you. 

20 So we now move on to the energy 

21 analysis and energy use characterization. The 

22 objective of this exercise is to provide 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 203

1 estimates of annual energy consumption of 

2 walk-in equipment at the various levels of 

3 efficiency. 

4 For the walk-in equipment with 

5 outside condensers, DOE also estimated the 

6 statewide energy consumption figures. That is 

7 primarily to analyze the impact of the climate 

8 variable on the performance of the walk-in 

9 units. 

10 So the results of these exercises 

11 are the complete system energy consumption, 

12 which combines both the envelope with a 

13 matched refrigeration system. And, of course, 

14 the whole thing has been detailed out in our 

15 TSD Chapter, Chapter 7, which gives details 

16 about what is there. 

17 So DOE analyzed the same 12 

18 representative envelopes, which we discussed 

19 in the engineering analysis. That was four 

20 equipment classes then three sizes each, each 

21 of them the large, medium, and small, and the 

22 four classes of products were the usual 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 204

1 dedicated -- I'm sorry, the freezers and the 

2 coolers, display and non-display. So that 

3 gave us the number 12. 

4 And these were combined, in turn, 

5 with either a dedicated indoor system of 

6 refrigeration or with a dedicated system but 

7 with an external condenser, and also the 

8 multiplex system. So this made the complete 

9 system. These are the pairing options. 

10 DOE has shown product loading, 

11 which I'm going to discuss in detail, what 

12 product loading we do. And also the duty 

13 cycle. 

14 Then the direct electrical energy 

15 consumption for the envelope was obtained 

16 using the proposed test procedure for the 

17 walk-in envelopes. And the refrigeration 

18 energy was computed using the AHRI 1250 test 

19 procedure. So this gave us the total energy 

20 consumption for the complete system. 

21 So this is the overall flow of 

22 data and the procedure which DOE has used. 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 205

1 First we had these green-colored boxes. Each 

2 represents some kind of grouping of energy use 

3 points. 

4 Like first we have got the 

5 envelope direct energy consumption. Then we 

6 have the components of the refrigeration 

7 system which are inside the box like the 

8 evaporator fan. So electric consumption due 

9 to those, they are captured in this second 

10 box, green box. 

11 And then finally we have got the 

12 third box, which is the refrigeration system 

13 energy consumption outside envelope, primarily 

14 the condensing unit, the compressor, and the 

15 fan, condensing fan which accounts for the 

16 large share of the overall energy consumption. 

17 So these three are added together 

18 to obtain the aggregate system energy 

19 consumption. 

20 And the other boxes, the white 

21 colored -- I mean the transparent boxes, they 

22 are really referring to the test procedure 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 206

1 which is generating the data like to our left, 

2 we have got the envelope test procedure, which 

3 is under discussion just now. And we capture 

4 the data from there and they feed into the 

5 envelope load calculations and also the 

6 envelope direct energy consumption. 

7 So in addition to this envelope 

8 load, we have got the other two loads coming 

9 up. There is a product load based on some 

10 assumptions. And we have the heat load, which 

11 is because of the presence of the 

12 refrigeration system components inside the 

13 box, which is really the evaporator fan 

14 primarily but there may be other things. 

15 So this is the whole scheme and 

16 the data flow for our energy calculation 

17 model. 

18 Okay, so first we take up the 

19 assumptions DOE made for the product load. I 

20 mean DOE didn't have any systematic study on 

21 this. So DOE actually studied various 

22 manufacturers' technical literature about what 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 207

1 is seen as the average load. 

2 In those technical literature, we 

3 find there is a reference to an average load 

4 where a product specific loading is not known 

5 and the product is not known. 

6 We looked at those figures. Of 

7 course there are not many of them. And we 

8 concluded that this could be possibly a 

9 reasonable assumption for computing the 

10 overall load for the box. 

11 First the product pull down 

12 temperature we took at ten degree Fahrenheit. 

13 Then specific heats, 0.9, 0.45, I am sure 

14 they are kind of standards -- 0.9 for the 

15 coolers where it is above the freezing point 

16 and 0.45 for frozen products where it is below 

17 the freezing point. 

18 And the loading ratio really 

19 refers to the loading ratio for the daily 

20 cycle. Like to give you an example, let's say 

21 a 300-cubic feet system, may really contain 

22 even 10,000 pounds of stuff. But on a daily 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 208

1 basis, the amount which shall be coming for 

2 storage there could be only in the rate of 

3 let's say four pounds per cubic feet or only 

4 about 1,200 pounds. 

5 So what DOE saw from various 

6 manufacturers' literature is four pounds per 

7 cubic feet for a 24-hour cycle is for the 

8 small coolers. Half to a figure of two pounds 

9 per cubic feet for the medium and large 

10 coolers. And DOE found that for freezer, the 

11 loading that shows respectively one pound for 

12 small and 0.5 pound for medium and large. 

13 So DOE used these figures to 

14 compute the product load. This product load 

15 was matched -- I mean added to the other two 

16 load components, what was shown earlier, and 

17 that really gave the whole total load of a 24-

18 hour-cycle and which DOE used for computing 

19 the energy consumption for a paired system. 

20 So now DOE seeks comments on these 

21 assumptions made for computing the product 

22 load, whether they are representative or they 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 209

1 not. It doesn't look right. 

2 MR. BROOKMAN: How about helping 

3 us out here? What do you think? Harmon? 

4 MR. LEWIS: As we learned from 

5 Heatcraft and Russell over the years, I think 

6 the cooler numbers, the four pounds and the 

7 two pounds are probably a little large that 

8 you would normally throw in for a fixed 

9 product load. And this is for walk-ins, I 

10 presume, that you consider just holding, 

11 nothing that you are pulling down a warm 

12 product. 

13 But the specific heats look right 

14 and the ten degrees is what we use. 

15 MR. BROOKMAN: What would the 

16 numbers be? 

17 MR. LEWIS: Probably two and one -

18 - 

19 MR. BROOKMAN: Two and one. 

20 MR. LEWIS: -- on the coolers. 

21 And the freezers, we use one and one. 

22 MR. BROOKMAN: One and one. 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 210

1 MR. LEWIS: Yes. 

2 MR. BROOKMAN: Okay. Okay. Thank 

3 you. That's helpful. 

4 Other comments on these numbers? 

5 (No response.) 

6 MR. BROOKMAN: They're building 

7 these up from assumptions, right? So every 

8 step in that link, it's helpful to have real 

9 numbers. 

10 (No response.) 

11 MR. BROOKMAN: Okay. 

12 DR. BANDYOPADHYAY: Thank you. 

13 DOE had to match a refrigeration 

14 system with a box. So these equations explain 

15 the methodology which DOE used to match the 

16 refrigeration system with the box. And DOE 

17 was guided by what has been provided in AHRI 

18 1250. 

19 So for the coolers, the column 

20 under the coolers, if you look at that, you'll 

21 see that the BLH there, which is really the 

22 high box load, then you have got the low box 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 211

1 load, and the duty cycle DOE has shown is that 

2 eight hours, the system run on the high box 

3 load and 16 hours it runs on the low box load. 

4 So the average total load is 

5 actually derived by using that equation in the 

6 third row, BLA, that eight is for eight hours, 

7 the 16 for 16 hours. And we're dividing the 

8 whole thing by 24 to get the average box load. 

9 So actually first we compute the 

10 average box load using the test procedure 

11 data. And from there we move on to compute 

12 the BLH and the BLL. And then it uses those 

13 equations, where actually it is linked to the 

14 capacity, to determine the actual capacity 

15 which will be required for the refrigeration 

16 system to match with the box. 

17 So primarily these are all based 

18 on AHRI 1250 assumptions. And DOE seeks 

19 comments on the duty cycle assumptions and the 

20 rationale to use the duty cycle assumptions 

21 same as what is there in the proposed 

22 refrigeration system test procedure, which is 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 212

1 AHRI 1250-2009. 

2 So this is really a very key step 

3 in this whole analysis because the whole 

4 analytical assumption and the cost of the 

5 system, everything is depending on how we do 

6 the matching. 

7 MR. BROOKMAN: So what about eight 

8 and 16, for example? Harmon? 

9 MR. LEWIS: I'd like to hear from 

10 Russell and from Bohn. But I would think it 

11 would almost reversed. And, again, we're food 

12 service. So looking at the average 

13 restaurants, a lot of those are serving three 

14 meals a day. 

15 So your are going to have more 

16 like 16 hours on the high box load and eight 

17 on the other. 

18 So I think at least an average of 

19 12 and 12 might represent the country. But 

20 eight and 16 seems real light. 

21 MR. BROOKMAN: Did you have data? 

22 How did you arrive at your eight and 16 as a 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 213

1 starting point? 

2 DR. BANDYOPADHYAY: Yes, these 

3 figures have been used in AHRI 1250. 

4 MR. BROOKMAN: Yes. 

5 DR. BANDYOPADHYAY: So we are 

6 really being guided by AHRI on this issue. 

7 MR. BROOKMAN: Okay. 

8 Yes, please, Mike? I see Mike. 

9 Go ahead. Call that guy out, go ahead. 

10 MR. STRAUB: Mike Straub, 

11 Heatcraft. 

12 I was on the engineering committee 

13 that actually developed -- worked on the AHRI 

14 1250 and that is a good representation of 

15 across the country -- 

16 MR. BROOKMAN: The full spectrum. 

17 MR. STRAUB: -- if you think about 

18 the daily use, you know, if you've got 

19 restaurants that are closed over the weekends, 

20 you've got specific restaurants that don't 

21 open on Sundays and stuff like that. So it is 

22 a pretty good representation. 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 214

1 And I agree that there are some 

2 that would have, you know, probably a balance. 

3 But I think it gives you a better weighted by 

4 doing the one-third, two-thirds. 

5 MR. BROOKMAN: Your committee 

6 sought to -- you sorted through that full 

7 distribution of use profiles. 

8 MR. STRAUB: Correct. 

9 MR. BROOKMAN: Okay. Thank you. 

10 Daryl, go ahead. 

11 MR. ERBS: Just to add to that 

12 comment. I mean it is an over-simplification 

13 of what really happens. But, you know, we 

14 rationalized that -- you know, a lot of 

15 restaurants actually are going to 24 hours. 

16 But they typically have periods -- I mean the 

17 walk-in is long-term storage. 

18 They have basically whip storage 

19 that are all of the reach ins. And so what 

20 you will find is based on meal times, they 

21 will load up their work stations with the 

22 products for that meal time period. 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 215

1 So they will be going in and out 

2 of the walk-in but it is only for that period 

3 of time. And then maybe some replenishment. 

4 And then you have to then look at 

5 display cases where you tend to get peak 

6 periods where people are, you know, if it is a 

7 convenience store, it's lunchtime, right. The 

8 doors are flying open for a couple of hours. 

9 And then it is all quiet clear to stocking 

10 period. 

11 So it is the best we could come up 

12 with in terms of just sort of trying to show 

13 that there are some times when the doors are 

14 opened a lot and times when they are not 

15 opened a lot. 

16 MR. BROOKMAN: So, Mike, do you 

17 think it is more like eight and 16? Or do you 

18 think it is more like 12 and 12? 

19 MR. STRAUB: The eight and 16. 

20 MR. BROOKMAN: Okay. 

21 MR. STRAUB: That's a better 

22 representation. 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 216

1 MR. BROOKMAN: Okay. Thank you. 

2 Nationwide? 

3 MR. STRAUB: Yes. 

4 MR. BROOKMAN: Okay. 

5 DR. BANDYOPADHYAY: Okay. Thank 

6 you. 

7 Well, the other issue which was 

8 considered in DOE's process of matching the 

9 capacity is something like a rounding off 

10 factor because DOE thought that what is really 

11 happening in the field over there in the lower 

12 sizes of the refrigeration equipment, the 

13 designer really may not really get the right 

14 size because the box load might show that if 

15 it is 10,000 pounds -- sorry, 10,000 BTUs per 

16 hour is what you need but the market may not 

17 offer exactly 10,000 pounds -- 10,000 BTUs per 

18 hour system. 

19 So what the designer would do is 

20 that probably he would specify a system with 

21 12,000 BTUs per hour system, which is a one22 ton system. 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 217

1 So what DOE did is DOE defined 

2 what we called as an oversize factor for 

3 matching the required capacity. And the 

4 closest refrigeration system capacity in the 

5 market. 

6 So what DOE did, DOE actually made 

7 an estimate that -- got these data points 

8 based on some assumptions saying that okay, if 

9 this is a required capacity, to what extent 

10 this could be oversized, and drew this data 

11 points across this chart where the required 

12 capacity in on the X axis and the oversize 

13 factor to the right. 

14 And one can see that as you move 

15 to the higher required capacity, let's say 

16 120,000 Btu which is really about a very high 

17 ten-ton system, there the oversizing issue 

18 really is not there because in your required 

19 capacity on the market, available capacity is 

20 nearly the same. 

21 So what DOE did, DOE got these 

22 data points and then drew a trend line across 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 218

1 these data points. And used that trend line 

2 equation to determine what is the right 

3 capacity which may be available from the 

4 market for all other sizes and requirements. 

5 MR. BROOKMAN: Jon, let's start 

6 with you. 

7 MR. McHUGH: So I look at this and 

8 it seems almost contradictory to the 

9 assumptions for the duty cycle. I mean we're 

10 assuming that under a high box load, that that 

11 load is approximately 70 percent. Now that's 

12 the average over the high load. 

13 The other thing is is that if 

14 people were only oversizing by five percent, 

15 there would be a lot of sick and dead people 

16 in the country. You know the fact of the 

17 matter is is that there is a lot of food 

18 safety issues at stake. And so the oversize 

19 factor is going to be huge. 

20 MR. BROOKMAN: Even -- and is the 

21 shape of the curve right? Or do you just 

22 question that as well? 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 219

1 DR. BANDYOPADHYAY: Wait -- sorry. 

2 MR. BROOKMAN: Daryl is going to 

3 do that. Go ahead. 

4 MR. ERBS: First one thing I want 

5 to clarify, my understanding was this was an 

6 additional oversizing -- 

7 DR. BANDYOPADHYAY: Yes, exactly. 

8 MR. ERBS: -- above and beyond the 

9 30 percent or 20 percent -- 

10 DR. BANDYOPADHYAY: Absolutely. 

11 MR. ERBS: -- that was standard 

12 practice for the safety factor. 

13 MR. BROOKMAN: Okay. 

14 MR. ERBS: And so there will be 

15 some of that. I'm a little surprised to see 

16 that, you know, at 20,000 BTU per hour and 

17 below, it goes up almost exponentially. 

18 I mean there are fairly small 

19 increments of capacity, you know, down below 

20 20,000. So I mean I haven't done the math. 

21 But I don't think you should have 

22 to oversize by 30 percent if you need -- I 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 220

1 don't know -- 8,000 BTU per hour or 6,000 

2 even. There are small enough increments. I 

3 don't think it is quite as bad as you are 

4 portraying it. 

5 MR. BROOKMAN: Harmon, go ahead. 

6 Same thing? 

7 MR. LEWIS: Yes, I agree. I think 

8 your chart -- in fact, our experiences up at 

9 some of the higher BTUs because, again, we're 

10 buying 80 percent Copeland condensing units. 

11 And that's a plug for Emerson. 

12 But there's only certain models 

13 available. And they are going to be in bigger 

14 increments. But the percentage, because you 

15 are dividing by a big number, might be the 

16 same. 

17 But down in the small increments, 

18 we'll start off with a half-horse at 5,000 

19 BTUs, and then the three-quarters 7,000, and 

20 then 9,000, or 10,000. So it's probably more 

21 like 15 percent is your max. 

22 And then at some point, you drop 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 221

1 down. But then you're going to have blips -- 

2 MR. BROOKMAN: Sure. 

3 MR. LEWIS: -- just because there 

4 is a system that is 15,000 apart probably 

5 starting at 45,000. 

6 MR. BROOKMAN: Let's hear from 

7 Warren. 

8 MR. BEETON: Warren Beeton. Just 

9 a question. 

10 Would you indeed add this oversize 

11 factor to the standard oversize factor? 

12 DR. BANDYOPADHYAY: Yes. 

13 MR. BEETON: Because if you know 

14 that you need 20 percent oversize and your 

15 closest system were 35 percent oversized 

16 anyway, why wouldn't you stop there? Why 

17 would you add two factors together? 

18 MR. BROOKMAN: Okay. Well, the 

19 way this curve -- go ahead, David, you want to 

20 add in here? 

21 MR. WINIARSKI: Sure. I think 

22 we've got some good comments on this. I will 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 222

1 say that I think one of the implicit 

2 assumptions in this curve was that at the low 

3 end, you were really purchasing things in like 

4 half-ton increments. 

5 So if you imagine you -- if you 

6 were in half-ton increments and your sizes 

7 were six to 12, the average might be nine. 

8 And you would oversize it by, you know, 33 

9 percent to get to 12. 

10 MR. BROOKMAN: So let's hear -- 

11 MR. WINIARSKI: But you're saying 

12 that there's closer increments. 

13 MR. BROOKMAN: Daryl? 

14 MR. ERBS: I mean we'll go like by 

15 quarter horsepower increments. 

16 DR. BANDYOPADHYAY: Yes. 

17 MR. ERBS: Really the compressors 

18 drive the steps. And when you get down into 

19 fractional horsepower, you can get them in 

20 quarter horsepower increments, which is more 

21 like -- I don't know -- 1,000, 1,500 BTU 

22 increments. 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 223

1 MR. WINIARSKI: Yes, I think this 

2 was based on looking at catalogue data which 

3 showed condenser and compressor sizes in those 

4 half-ton increments. But if it closer 

5 matching, that's perfect. 

6 MR. BROOKMAN: Okay. Good thank 

7 you. And I would just note for the record 

8 that a couple of other manufacturers just 

9 agreed with Daryl by shaking their heads yes. 

10 Okay. Thank you. That's helpful. 

11 Okay. So then other final 

12 comments on this chart, which I think 

13 stimulated a lot of good information for the 

14 Department? Because we're going to keep moving 

15 on. 

16 (No response.) 

17 MR. BROOKMAN: Okay. 

18 DR. BANDYOPADHYAY: Yes. So I 

19 think this that the comments are very valuable 

20 and DOE would modify this chart to accommodate 

21 the market realities. 

22 So here we have the final energy -

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 224

1 - annual energy consumption figures for a 

2 combined system. This is just an example for 

3 a medium, storage-type cooler with a dedicated 

4 medium temperature outdoor system. 

5 And the figures you see here, the 

6 first line -- the line at the top in green, 

7 that represents a baseline efficiency 

8 refrigeration system paired with a box. And 

9 box efficiencies are improving as we move 

10 along the X axis. 

11 So one can see that the baseline 

12 system, the baseline envelope were paired with 

13 a baseline refrigeration system, it started 

14 with energy consumption of 16,000 kilowatt 

15 hour per year and it dropped down to let's say 

16 about 6,000 kilowatt hours per year when all 

17 the energy-saving features, what has been 

18 considered in the design and engineering 

19 analysis are implemented. 

20 And same way when the boxes is 

21 paired with a refrigeration system, which has 

22 got a higher efficiency, the median 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 225

1 efficiency, the efficiency levels fall from -- 

2 let's say from -- it goes up also drastically 

3 from 16,000 to with a baseline system it falls 

4 down to 8,000. 

5 And then we have got the max tech 

6 option where the refrigeration system is the 

7 highest efficiency. It is also paired with a 

8 system moving from the baseline efficiency 

9 level to the highest efficiency level for the 

10 envelope. And that is the blue line. 

11 So I mean obviously this captures 

12 what really is the full scope of energy saving 

13 technologies in both envelope and also the 

14 refrigeration system. 

15 MR. BROOKMAN: Is this actual 

16 data? Or is this an illustration? 

17 DR. BANDYOPADHYAY: No, this is 

18 actual data what DOE has computed at this 

19 stage of the analysis. But this is very 

20 preliminary. I mean we have heard all these 

21 questions about infiltration and other issues 

22 which is involved in engineering analysis. 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 226

1 But this is really taking all the 

2 data from the engineering analysis and using 

3 this methodology which I just explained to 

4 capture the energy consumption for this box 

5 and the refrigeration system, whole system, 

6 integrated. 

7 MR. BROOKMAN: Do do you want them 

8 to comment on the shape of the curves? 

9 DR. BANDYOPADHYAY: Well, 

10 actually, I think this is the food for thought 

11 or not food for thought or it is shocking or 

12 it is not shocking. 

13 (Laughter.) 

14 MR. BROOKMAN: John McHugh? 

15 MR. McHUGH: So I think it was 

16 briefly described earlier but maybe not made 

17 so explicit. But on the larger walk-ins, 

18 really the base case is semi-hermetic 

19 compressors. And so that baseline efficiency 

20 is pretty darn high. 

21 And I don't know what's being 

22 proposed -- you know first off, is that what 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 227

1 is being assumed for large walk-ins? And then 

2 if that is, what are your measures to get 

3 beyond that? 

4 MR. BROOKMAN: So what, is that 

5 your assumption? 

6 DR. BANDYOPADHYAY: Assumptions, I 

7 think are from engineering side because here 

8 the data is coming in from there. 

9 MR. BROOKMAN: Rebecca Legett? 

10 MS. LEGETT: The answer to your 

11 question is no. Semi-hermetic was not 

12 considered as baseline. And if you recommend 

13 that it should be, that is good for us to 

14 know. 

15 MR. BROOKMAN: That's in broad 

16 distribution? 

17 MR. McHUGH: In broad 

18 distribution, yes. 

19 MR. BROOKMAN: Okay. 

20 MS. LEGETT: And what sizes of 

21 equipment does that apply to? 

22 MR. BROOKMAN: And you're talking 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 228

1 beyond California? 

2 MR. McHUGH: Well, most of my 

3 experience is from there but we've got quite a 

4 few people around the table that could respond 

5 to that. 

6 MR. ERBS: Well, I mean we 

7 actually -- we do both in some sizes. That's 

8 more customer driven. I mean there is a price 

9 premium associated with semi-hermetic. 

10 It gives them that ability though 

11 to maintain the equipment over a longer period 

12 of time. So it depends, I guess, on the 

13 perspective of the customer. 

14 \ But the other thing that I would -

15 - the interesting observation for me is as you 

16 make the envelope more efficient, the gains 

17 from improving the refrigeration system 

18 efficiency are diminished and vice versa. 

19 And also even if you started with 

20 semi-hermetic in your base, by the time you 

21 get down to better or best envelope and better 

22 or best refrigeration, you are back into 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 229

1 hermetics. And they are less efficient. 

2 And I suspect that again that's 

3 something you may not have included in your 

4 analysis is that as you drive the loads down, 

5 you will actually, just by virtue of the 

6 nature of the components, lose some 

7 efficiency. 

8 MR. BROOKMAN: Yes, because 

9 they're not working as hard. 

10 MR. ERBS: Well, no, they're just 

11 -- the smaller they get, the less efficient 

12 they get. 

13 MR. BROOKMAN: Oh, I see. Okay. 

14 And, John, did you find that 

15 number? 

16 MR. McHUGH: I don't see the 

17 number but I know for the size that was looked 

18 at was like a 1,200 square foot walk-in so -- 

19 MR. BROOKMAN: Okay. 

20 MR. STRAUB: This is Mike. 

21 For a size perspective, I think 

22 when you did the analysis, it was like 12,000 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 230

1 BTUs, 24,000 BTUs. So, again, you're talking 

2 about small systems, maybe convenience stores. 

3 In that range, you might be talking about 

4 two, three horsepower. 

5 Semi-hermetics, for us, typically 

6 play over five to six horsepower. And that 

7 becomes a dominant compressor. And you 

8 wouldn't find very many scroll compressors in 

9 sizes about that through the marketplace. 

10 MR. BROOKMAN: Okay. Thank you. 

11 Harmon? 

12 MS. LEGETT: Thank you. 

13 MR. LEWIS: Yes, for at least the 

14 last 20 years, hermetics are 95 percent of our 

15 refrigeration sales versus five percent are 

16 semi-hermetic. And, again, it is a cost point 

17 -- again, five horsepower and below are the 

18 predominant ones there. 

19 Also out in the service world, the 

20 mechanic at 100 dollars an hour doesn't go out 

21 and change the reeds out of the semi-hermetic 

22 compressor. Just like a hermetic, he takes it 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 231

1 off, goes to the wholesaler and gets another 

2 one, bolts in on and away he goes. 

3 The semi-hermetic serviceability, 

4 it isn't there. And we self-insure the last 

5 four years of our five-year compressor 

6 warranty and track it. And the hermetics are 

7 more efficient as less likely to fail than the 

8 semi-hermetics. 

9 So, again, we may just have too 

10 small a semi-hermetic sample size. But over 

11 20 years, that has held true. 

12 MR. BROOKMAN: That they -- that 

13 would be in the baseline? 

14 Mike? 

15 MR. LEWIS: Well, yes, I don't 

16 know which -- whether you've got semi17 hermetic, hermetic, whatever. But you've got 

18 to look within the marketplace. 

19 Semi-hermetics at below five 

20 horsepower don't have a hold in the 

21 foodservice industry because of the price. 

22 MR. BROOKMAN: Okay. Okay. These 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 232

1 are very helpful comments. 

2 Final comments on this chart on 

3 page 59? 

4 (No response.) 

5 MR. BROOKMAN: Okay. 

6 DR. BANDYOPADHYAY: Okay. Thank 

7 you. 

8 So now I would hand over to Gavin 

9 McCormick, who will be discussing the 

10 remaining sections of this analysis. 

11 MR. McCORMICK: Yes, good 

12 afternoon. Again, my name is Gavin McCormick 

13 from Pacific Northwest National Laboratory. 

14 And I'm here to discuss with you 

15 today three of the economic sections or, as I 

16 like to think of it, all of the hard work has 

17 actually been completed at this point. And 

18 I'm just going to be tallying up the 

19 implications of the costs of energy. 

20 So that means the life-cycle cost 

21 and payback period analysis, shipments 

22 analysis, and national impacts analysis. 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 233

1 So the life-cycle cost and payback 

2 period analysis takes place from the point of 

3 view of the consumer. It is designed to 

4 answer the question that revolves around a 

5 typical case where more efficient equipment 

6 costs more than baseline equipment but uses 

7 less energy over time. And, therefore, saves 

8 you money over time. 

9 So the basic question this 

10 analysis is trying to answer is, is that a 

11 good deal for the consumer given the details? 

12 And so there are two different 

13 ways in which the analysis tries to answer 

14 this question. The first is by looking at 

15 life-cycle cost. 

16 So we simply add up all the costs 

17 that a consumer might spend on a walk-in over 

18 its lifetime, starting with the initial 

19 purchase cost and the going through the energy 

20 costs. And so there what we're looking at is 

21 the savings between the base case and a more 

22 efficient walk-in. 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 234

1 And entirely separate way you 

2 could answer the same question is what is the 

3 payback period on the extra cost of a more 

4 efficient walk-in? So the life-cycle costs, 

5 we're essentially adding up all of the costs 

6 over the lifetime and just subtracting between 

7 a more efficient walk-in and a baseline walk8 in to see whether it is a positive or negative 

9 cost change. 

10 And the payback period is answered 

11 in terms of how many years would it take to -- 

12 of lower costs to gain our initially higher 

13 cost. So it is more like dividing. And all 

14 of this methodology is present in Chapter 8 of 

15 the TSD. 

16 I don't think it is worth going 

17 into too much detail of this diagram, which is 

18 also presented in the TSD. But the key part 

19 here is just that the blue sections you see, 

20 the payback period, PBP, and life-cycle costs, 

21 LCC, are two entirely independent outputs of 

22 this analysis but all the same inputs go into 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 235

1 them, all of the different costs that we were 

2 able to quantify. The installation cost of 

3 installing a walk-in, the end user equipment 

4 price of that walking coming out of the 

5 previous analysis like the markups analysis, 

6 the cost of electricity and several other 

7 costs. 

8 So one of the most important costs 

9 that we consider here is the electricity. And 

10 we use a fairly common DOE procedure for 

11 estimating future electricity prices. We 

12 start with EIA Form 861 data, which collects 

13 prices that have been actually charged by 

14 different utilities in different states. 

15 And the advantage of that data 

16 source is that it is very up to date and very 

17 detailed. But, of course, since it is actual 

18 data, it doesn't go into the future. 

19 So then we estimate future 

20 electricity prices by growing the Form 861 

21 data prices by the Annual Energy Outlook 

22 forecasts for the next 30 years. And those 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 236

1 are produced by the Energy Information 

2 Administration. 

3 We use average prices for this 

4 analysis. We don't look at time-of-use 

5 pricing because a walk-in is typically on all 

6 day. And we don't look at marginal prices or 

7 anything like that. 

8 Once we have the electricity 

9 costs, we also look at repair, maintenance, 

10 and replacement costs. We assume that the 

11 repair cost scales with the cost of a walk-in. 

12 So we represent the repair cost as a 

13 percentage of the purchase cost. 

14 And so a more efficient walk-in 

15 that costs more money would have a higher 

16 repair cost. And that would be captured in 

17 our analysis. 

18 By contrast, our maintenance costs 

19 we assume are flat over any efficiency level. 

20 So while we do look at different costs that 

21 go into maintaining a walk-in, for example 

22 cleaning it, because those don't vary between 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 237

1 different efficiency levels, they actually 

2 have almost no impact on the analysis. So 

3 maintenance costs here are not terribly 

4 important. 

5 And then separately we account 

6 replacement costs. It was DOE's assumption 

7 that a refrigeration system typically does not 

8 last as long as an envelope. So over the 

9 lifetime of one envelope, you have to account 

10 for multiple refrigeration systems. 

11 And so we include the cost of 

12 buying one or more additional refrigeration 

13 systems over the lifetime of one box. 

14 And so at this time we would 

15 welcome any comments, if there are any, on 

16 maintenance or repair costs. In particular, 

17 would they be greater with more efficient 

18 walk-ins? 

19 MR. BROOKMAN: So you can see a 

20 lot of -- that was a good explanation and a 

21 lot of what is embedded here. 

22 So Warren, you want to start? 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 238

1 MR. BEETON: Warren Beeton. A 

2 couple of points on the maintenance costs. 

3 First of all, you assumed the same maintenance 

4 cost. 

5 One factor that you might -- I 

6 think would want to pay attention to for the 

7 future is if we get a cap-and-trade bill, 

8 refrigerant costs are going to be maybe five 

9 to ten times more than they are today. And 

10 there is some leakage rate. 

11 And so the cost of replacing 

12 refrigerant, it could -- that is a scenario. 

13 Don't know that it will happen. But it could 

14 be a very significant factor down the road. 

15 And it would be -- secondly, it 

16 would be a function of efficiency because more 

17 efficient systems will have more refrigerant 

18 charge. And that charge will be much more 

19 expensive in that scenario. 

20 And then another possible factor 

21 is that maintenance cost could also be higher 

22 with greater refrigerant charge due to more 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 239

1 issues in the system. 

2 So there are multiple things 

3 there. 

4 MR. McHUGH: Thank you. Those are 

5 very helpful. 

6 MR. BROOKMAN: Warren, do your 

7 scenarios include that if refrigerant costs go 

8 up that you'll find a way to do leakage less? 

9 MR. BEETON: I think that would be 

10 an offset. I honestly think there would be a 

11 factor there but I don't think it would be a 

12 complete offset all. 

13 MR. BROOKMAN: Okay. Just thought 

14 I'd ask. 

15 Yes, Jon? 

16 MR. McHUGH: So, I've got a couple 

17 of questions. First off is what are you using 

18 for the life of the envelope versus the life 

19 of the equipment? 

20 MR. McCORMICK: We'll get into 

21 more detail later. But a current assumption 

22 is about 15, 16 years for an envelope. And 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 240

1 about half that for a refrigeration system. 

2 And we will cover that more later. 

3 MR. McHUGH: And then also related 

4 to discount rates, what are you using as your 

5 -- well, for the ASHRAE standards what they do 

6 is they actually wrap that all together, use a 

7 period of analysis, and the escalation for 

8 fuel, and, of course, the discount rate for 

9 capital. 

10 And they come up with what they 

11 call a scalar. Have you folks calculated a 

12 similar scalar for these proceedings? 

13 MR. McCORMICK: If I'm 

14 understanding your question correctly, we 

15 have. What I'm going to present in about two 

16 slides is information on the discount rates. 

17 That should answer that. 

18 MR. McHUGH: Okay. Thanks. 

19 MR. BROOKMAN: Daryl? 

20 MR. ERBS: I don't have data for 

21 you. But I guess I'd suggest from an annual 

22 maintenance cost, if it is something that is 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 241

1 adding additional mechanical parts, then the 

2 cost will go up. 

3 So some of your technical options 

4 will definitely -- I would think like 

5 something like strip curtains, I'm not sure if 

6 anyone knows how long they will last but I 

7 don't think they last the life of the box. I 

8 don't know if it is two years. But, you know, 

9 you have to replace them. 

10 If you add additional controls, 

11 they will some failure rates. So it probably 

12 needs some analysis but I suggest that there 

13 needs to be some relationship between 

14 technical options and the annual maintenance 

15 costs. 

16 MR. McCORMICK: If I can ask a 

17 follow-up question on that, I just wanted to 

18 be clear. One assumption we have often made 

19 is the equipment like, for example, strip 

20 curtains, if it broke, it might be replaced as 

21 opposed to repaired. And so then -- 

22 MR. ERBS: Oh, is that not an 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 242

1 annual cost? 

2 MR. McCORMICK: Right. And this 

3 is -- you could -- 

4 MR. ERBS: We're probably going to 

5 warrant them for 30 days. 

6 MR. McCORMICK: To just make sure 

7 we're addressing your comment properly, I'm 

8 distinguishing here and perhaps you could do 

9 it another way, between maintenance costs and 

10 replacement or repair costs. 

11 So I would assume a more expensive 

12 strip curtain that had to be replaced, that 

13 would all be accounted for in this. Is that 

14 what you are getting at? 

15 MR. ERBS: Yes. 

16 MR. McCORMICK: Okay. Thank you. 

17 MR. BROOKMAN: Eric? 

18 MR. FITZ: And we're talking about 

19 strip curtains. But we would love some 

20 information on replacement rates of doors, 

21 both glass doors and opaque doors. 

22 MR. ERBS: And that is something 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 243

1 we can probably dig up. 

2 MR. FITZ: Okay. That would be 

3 great. 

4 MR. BROOKMAN: Okay. Great. 

5 Are there other -- yes, please. 

6 MR. ANDERSEN: Eric Andersen, 

7 Pacific Northwest National Laboratory. 

8 Along the lines of that last 

9 comment, we would also welcome data that would 

10 help us assess leakage rates on particular 

11 systems and refrigerant replacement over time. 

12 MR. BROOKMAN: Okay. Thank you. 

13 Okay, I think that -- any other comments on 

14 life-cycle costs, payback period analysis, 

15 repair, maintenance, and replacement costs? 

16 These have been useful comments. 

17 MR. McCORMICK: So we actually 

18 covered both of those comments, I believe. 

19 MR. BROOKMAN: Yes. 

20 MR. McCORMICK: Great. 

21 So a separate issue, installation 

22 costs. We relied primarily on RS Means’ 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 244

1 Handbook of Cost Information for installation 

2 costs. And we just run a straight regression 

3 for each of our equipment classes for which we 

4 can find information. 

5 Let me restart that. We run a 

6 straight regression for each type of equipment 

7 such as small unit coolers on installation 

8 costs and use that. 

9 We would welcome if there are any 

10 additional data sources on installation costs. 

11 That wasn't a comment box, sorry about that. 

12 MR. BROOKMAN: That's good. 

13 Yes, Daryl, Daryl, go ahead. 

14 MR. ERBS: Daryl, I actually think 

15 that where you would find a bigger break might 

16 be based on -- I mean we're talking here 

17 coolers. So is this the refrigeration system 

18 and the box? Or just the -- 

19 MR. McCORMICK: This is both, yes. 

20 MR. ERBS: Okay. So the -- I mean 

21 it depends on whether it is indoors or 

22 outdoors. That would be one big difference. 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 245

1 So, you know, if I put a 

2 condensing unit on the roof, I've got to go 

3 through a roof, it becomes a much bigger task 

4 than setting it on top of the box. 

5 And then whether the box is just 

6 set inside an envelope or if it is an outdoor 

7 box makes a really big difference in terms of 

8 the amount of labor. 

9 MR. BROOKMAN: Jon? 

10 MR. McHUGH: So just giving that 

11 we are comparing an outdoor unit to an outdoor 

12 unit, those things are going to probably drop 

13 out of their analysis. I'm expecting that 

14 what you are looking at is the marginal 

15 increase in cost when you are increasing the 

16 size. 

17 MR. McCORMICK: Yes, that's a very 

18 good point. 

19 MR. BROOKMAN: Yes? 

20 MR. LEWIS: On this you've 

21 considered the evaporator coil unit cooler 

22 separate from the condensing unit. But within 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 246

1 food service, those are typically always 

2 installed by the same person. So it is kind 

3 of disjointed because you don't have two 

4 different outfits going out there to do it. 

5 And whether your numbers are, 

6 there again, I'd have to look at what -- 

7 MR. BROOKMAN: But they're 

8 different functions though. 

9 MR. LEWIS: Well, I mean they are 

10 different functions but it is the same 

11 mechanical contractor that is going to do that 

12 work. You don't have one guy that comes in 

13 and just mounts the evaporator. 

14 They've got to be interconnected 

15 with line sets, evacuated, charged, and 

16 started up. So it's about one entity 

17 typically. 

18 MR. LLENZA: This is Charles 

19 Llenza from the Department of Energy. 

20 It would be beneficial for the 

21 Department if we got maybe a better 

22 description of the maintenance process that 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 247

1 the walk-in coolers go through over a period 

2 of time. 

3 And if you had some general 

4 information you could provide us on what the 

5 industry does to maintain this equipment, that 

6 would be great. 

7 MR. BROOKMAN: What the expected 

8 service cycle would be, that's one thing. 

9 MR. LLENZA: Right. Costs and 

10 what kind of things you do over time to 

11 maintain this -- this equipment. 

12 MR. BROOKMAN: I see Gopal. Let's 

13 hear from you. Get close to that microphone. 

14 It's not on. 

15 DR. BANDYOPADHYAY: This is Gopal 

16 from Pacific Northwest National Lab. 

17 In the RS Means Handbook, which we 

18 have used for getting this installation data, 

19 there are separate tables for the condensing 

20 unit and a separate table for the unit 

21 coolers. Unit coolers they have given data in 

22 both small unit coolers and large unit 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 248

1 coolers. 

2 And they have used actually in 

3 fact different types of crew for installations 

4 of these. So this data have been aggregated 

5 and have been used in our model. 

6 MR. BROOKMAN: Yes. Going back to 

7 the maintenance cycle stuff, you -- the 

8 manufacturers, you produce a maintenance 

9 schedule, right, don't you? Something like 

10 that? Okay. So it would be very helpful to 

11 provide that, yes. 

12 MR. McCORMICK: So another 

13 important input here is the discount rate. 

14 And there are different ways to talk about a 

15 discount rate. 

16 For the life-cycle cost analysis 

17 what we mean here is the ability of a walk-in 

18 consumer to trade money now for money in the 

19 future. So if you were to spend a certain 

20 amount of money now and get that same money 

21 back ten years from now, that would not be a 

22 particularly good deal. 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 249

1 So the question on the discount 

2 rate is how much more money would you have to 

3 get back later to make it a good deal? 

4 The way that the Department 

5 calculates discount rates in this context is 

6 based on a weighted average cost of capital 

7 calculation. This is a fairly standard 

8 industry method. 

9 And we get our information from 

10 Professor Damodaran of New York University who 

11 publishes this information free online. And 

12 that's available in the TSD. 

13 But what this is saying 

14 essentially is that if you look at where the 

15 debt and the savings of, for example, a 

16 convenience store might be, you can figure out 

17 the interest rate they are earning or spending 

18 over time. 

19 So you can figure out what sort of 

20 deal they might be willing to accept 

21 financially to trade a more expensive walk-in 

22 now for lower costs later. 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 250

1 And then the lifetimes, I'm going 

2 to get into more in the shipment section. But 

3 just very briefly again, we use about a 15-

4 year lifetime for envelopes. 

5 And the way we do LCC analysis is 

6 over the lifetime of one envelope as opposed 

7 to one refrigeration system. Since you are 

8 pairing them, we sort of had to make a choice. 

9 And so we take the longer lived of the two 

10 components. 

11 And so over the lifetime of an 

12 envelope, that typically comes out to about 

13 two refrigeration systems is our assumption. 

14 And we'll cover lifetimes more later. 

15 So it's rather difficult to 

16 summarize the life-cycle cost results because 

17 we have so very many equipment classes, 

18 efficiency levels, sizes, and so on. So this 

19 is a summary statistic we have developed to 

20 try to get across the basic implications. 

21 And, again, this is a preliminary 

22 analysis. Don't pay too much attention to the 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 251

1 precise numbers. But the method here is what 

2 is important. 

3 And what this graph is showing is 

4 that for different efficiency levels for the 

5 refrigeration system and the box or envelope, 

6 you can imagine different matched pairings of 

7 efficiency levels going all the way from 0, 0, 

8 which would be the base case, to what we call 

9 the max tech scenario. 

10 You can talk about the life-cycle 

11 cost savings of going from the base case to 

12 that scenario. And what we typically find 

13 with our current inputs is that you often get 

14 the maximum savings at a fairly high but not 

15 the highest efficiency level. 

16 So this graph is coded by a color 

17 temperature. So the red numbers are just the 

18 lowest and then it goes all the way up to -- 

19 the pairing 6, 6 has the highest life-cycle 

20 cost savings we find. And we have one of 

21 these for every equipment class. 

22 MR. BROOKMAN: And this is 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 252

1 illustrative? 

2 MR. McCORMICK: These are our 

3 actual outputs. 

4 MR. BROOKMAN: Okay. 

5 Yes, Harmon? 

6 MR. LEWIS: One thing I think you 

7 -- I don't know how you factor it in but a 

8 non-chain restaurant has a failure rate of 

9 about 70 percent in the first year nationwide. 

10 So he's not interested in what happens out at 

11 year ten. He's worried about what is my 

12 lowest cost of equipment to get started up. 

13 And if I survive, my second walk14 in or my second refrigeration, I can afford to 

15 look at what happens over a longer period. 

16 And the chain accounts will look 

17 opposite. They're going to look for what is 

18 going to happen over a ten-year period. But 

19 they are going to be, you know, 30 percent of 

20 the sales and the mom and pop probably 70 

21 percent. 

22 So it's just something to look at. 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 253

1 The marketplace is looking for lowest entry 

2 level on equipment costs and they'll look 

3 later for the savings. 

4 MR. LLENZA: Charlie Llenza, 

5 Department of Energy. 

6 That would be reflected in the 

7 shipments, right? The shipments that we see 

8 on the kind of -- so you would see a lot of 

9 shipments of lower end units. 

10 MR. LEWIS: Probably. 

11 MR. LLENZA: And then that's the 

12 way we capture what the market looks like. 

13 MR. BROOKMAN: Or they'd be 

14 recycled units or used units? 

15 MR. LEWIS: Could be. Again, we 

16 only sell new so I'm not sure how much the 

17 other is. 

18 MR. LLENZA: I don't think -- do 

19 we take -- we don't take into account used 

20 units, do we? 

21 MR. McCORMICK: No. 

22 MR. LLENZA: No, so we would 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 254

1 normally deal with the new units. 

2 MR. BROOKMAN: Daryl? 

3 MR. ERBS: Yes, actually I would 

4 even suggest that the chains, which most 

5 chains are franchising operations, and so you 

6 still end up with an owner-operator who, you 

7 know, typically we find the more progressive 

8 of them then will look at a two-year payback. 

9 A lot of them one year. There are 

10 some cases where the chains will actually, you 

11 know, help them with a bit longer. 

12 So one of the things I would be 

13 interested in seeing is, you know, just what 

14 is a simple payback on these scenarios. It's 

15 good to see the life-cycle costs. But without 

16 understanding the payback, it's not as useful 

17 to understand whether we're going to run into 

18 some of these options being viable. 

19 MR. McCORMICK: Thank you. That's 

20 all very helpful. And you're making me wish 

21 that I had the next slide be payback periods. 

22 But for that, you'll have to look in the TSD. 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 255

1 An additional comment or category 

2 here is the Monte Carlo simulation. We have 

3 not done this yet. This is for the next stage 

4 of the analysis. 

5 But just to give you a heads up, 

6 so far we've talked about the average savings 

7 for a particular type of walk-in. But you can 

8 imagine that for different consumers they're 

9 actually going to experience different 

10 savings. 

11 In different states, you have 

12 different sales taxes. Different people pay 

13 different electricity rates. The actual 

14 energy use of the walk-in might vary by 

15 climate region. Things like that. 

16 So for the next stage of the 

17 analysis, we're going to conduct a simulation 

18 where we look at 10,000 different scenarios. 

19 And for those 10,000 scenarios, we'll vary all 

20 of these factors and see, on average, how many 

21 consumers are coming out ahead or behind 

22 rather than on average how much are they 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 256

1 coming out ahead or behind by. 

2 Any other comments on the life3 cycle costs or payback period analysis? 

4 DR. AMRANE: Karim Amrane, AHRI. 

5 I just -- to answer the question 

6 about life-cycle costs or payback, I 

7 understand that you would be basing your 

8 decision at the end of that day on the LCC, 

9 not the payback, right? Is it correct? 

10 MR. McCORMICK: Yes, I would say 

11 that it is combination of those. It's not a 

12 straight procedure whereby we take exactly -- 

13 DR. AMRANE: Well, my experience 

14 anyway dealing with those rulemakings is that 

15 DOE has always based -- almost -- most of the 

16 time based its outcome on the life-cycle cost. 

17 MR. BROOKMAN: Charles Llenza? 

18 MR. LLENZA: Yes, it comes down to 

19 the dollars and cents. 

20 DR. AMRANE: Yes. I don't think 

21 we'll be taking this into account at the end 

22 of the day. 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 257

1 MR. McCORMICK: And just to 

2 clarify one more thing on that. The discount 

3 rates that were used, because they are based 

4 on weighted average cost of capital, that will 

5 mean that, for example, a small business, 

6 which is more likely to go out of business in 

7 its first year, they will have a higher 

8 average cost of capital. So they will have 

9 higher discount rates. But not, perhaps, as 

10 much higher as you were talking about. 

11 So thank you for those comments. 

12 Anything else? 

13 MR. BROOKMAN: Okay, Jon? 

14 MR. McHUGH: Going back to the 

15 scalar question, so what’s the scalar? 

16 MR. McCORMICK: Yes. 

17 MR. McHUGH: Show them the next 

18 section and show the scalar. 

19 MR. McCORMICK: Excellent point. 

20 And so just to clarify that I understood you 

21 correctly, so I'm not misleading you, to get 

22 across the discount rates, in our spreadsheet, 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 258

1 we translate an X percent discount rate over 

2 time into a scalar. 

3 Are you asking me what that scalar 

4 is? Or have I misunderstood? 

5 MR. McHUGH: Yes. 

6 MR. McCORMICK: Okay. Sure. A 

7 typical discount rate that we use that's in 

8 the LCC is between five and seven percent, 

9 depending on the building type. Right off the 

10 top of my head, I'm not sure what that scalar 

11 becomes. 

12 MR. McHUGH: And related to that, 

13 so a scalar is, though, is a combination of 

14 the discount rate and the escalation rate in 

15 the period of analysis. So what are sort of 

16 the range of scalars that you are looking at 

17 for this analysis. 

18 MR. McCORMICK: Sure. I'm going 

19 to answer you but it looks like Dave Winiarski 

20 would like to say something first here. 

21 MR. WINIARSKI: Oh, go ahead 

22 first. 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 259

1 MR. McCORMICK: Okay. Great. So 

2 then we don't literally use a scalar in that 

3 way. We calculate each of those factors and 

4 turn each factor into scalar rate. 

5 I would have to point you towards 

6 the TSD or the spreadsheet to say what those 

7 turn into. Sorry I can't do any better than 

8 that. 

9 MR. McHUGH: Okay. Thanks. 

10 MR. BROOKMAN: Dave? 

11 MR. WINIARSKI: Yes, I was just 

12 going to follow up a little bit. I know, Jon, 

13 you and I both have been involved like in 

14 ASHRAE 90.1 work where a scalar has been 

15 derived to sort of provide a simplified way of 

16 expressing all of these economic issues in 

17 sort of one metric. 

18 And that typically has not been 

19 done for DOE's plant standards rulemaking. 

20 But if you take the discount rate and you take 

21 the escalation rate, you can effectively build 

22 up something like a scalar. 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 260

1 MR. McHUGH: So I guess related to 

2 that, what is the escalation rate? 

3 MR. McCORMICK: So for 

4 electricity, for example, the escalation rate 

5 is roughly one. So we use the Annual Energy 

6 Outlook forecasts. And they don't rise very 

7 much over time. 

8 MR. McCORMICK: Thank you. 

9 MR. BROOKMAN: Thank you. 

10 Okay, we're going to keep pressing 

11 on here. 

12 Daryl, final comment. 

13 MR. ERBS: I just wanted 

14 clarification on one thing I did see in here. 

15 What is this rebuttable presumption payback 

16 period? I interpret it to mean if you didn't 

17 get a three-year feedback that it wasn't good 

18 to go. But is that not correct? 

19 MR. BROOKMAN: Is that in this -- 

20 where is that located? 

21 MR. ERBS: It's on 8-20. 

22 MR. BROOKMAN: In the TSD. Who 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 261

1 would answer that? 

2 MR. ERBS: 8.3.2. 

3 MR. BROOKMAN: So David, yes, Dave 

4 Winiarski, you wanted to -- 

5 MR. WINIARSKI: I'll give John 

6 first opportunity if he wants to. 

7 MR. CYMBALSKY: So if you create -

8 - if you do the analysis and it is the three9 year payback, you can go ahead with the 

10 standard without doing any extra analysis. 

11 MR. ERBS: Oh, okay. I had it 

12 backwards. 

13 MR. LLENZA: But the Department -- 

14 this is Charlie Llenza, Department of Energy. 

15 But in real practice the 

16 Department prefers to do the full analysis? 

17 MR. McCORMICK: Right. 

18 MR. LLENZA: So we don't just stop 

19 because we get the three-year payback or 

20 three-and-a-half-year payback, whatever it is. 

21 So you'll -- we'll -- 

22 MR. ERBS: It's an option. 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 262

1 MR. LLENZA: Right. It's an 

2 option that's in the legislation, right? 

3 MR. ERBS: Yes. 

4 MR. LLENZA: Is that correct? 

5 MR. McCORMICK: But we do the full 

6 analysis. 

7 MR. BROOKMAN: Betsy, do you want 

8 to add on here? 

9 MS. KOHL: No. 

10 (Laughter.) 

11 MR. BROOKMAN: Okay. 

12 MS. KOHL: This is a topic for 

13 discussion within the Department but we 

14 typically, as Charlie said, do the full 

15 analysis. 

16 MR. BROOKMAN: Yes. Okay. Dave, 

17 briefly. 

18 MR. WINIARSKI: Yes, real quick, 

19 yes. 

20 MR. BROOKMAN: Yes. 

21 MR. WINIARSKI: One of the 

22 differences in the calculation procedure to do 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 263

1 the rebuttable payback is under the 

2 legislation, it is the -- I think it is the 

3 energy savings in the first year and the first 

4 cost of the equipment. So it doesn't take 

5 into account things like maintenance issues 

6 and stuff like that, which is one of the 

7 reasons, I think, the Department likes to look 

8 at the full life-cycle cost implications. 

9 MR. BROOKMAN: Okay. Thank you. 

10 We're going to press on here. 

11 MR. McCORMICK: Next is shipments 

12 analysis. 

13 So the purpose of the shipments 

14 analysis is to quantify how many of these 

15 walk-ins we're dealing with. So it is very 

16 much, in addition to the shipments, covering 

17 the installed base of walk-ins at any given 

18 time. 

19 So a key implication of this 

20 analysis, for example, is that if you know the 

21 energy savings from each walk-in, you have to 

22 know how many are in use to know the national 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 264

1 energy savings. 

2 So our shipments analysis would 

3 ideally have fantastic data, even going out 

4 into the future about the shipments are. In 

5 practice what we have to do is a somewhat 

6 roundabout method. And so we're going to be 

7 very much asking for data in this section as 

8 well. 

9 The best data that DOE was able to 

10 start with was historical stock information. 

11 So I'll cover that in a moment. But we start 

12 with historical stock information. Based on 

13 the rate at which the equipment must be 

14 replaced, we're able to estimate the shipments 

15 that are necessary to get that kind of stock 

16 in every year. And, again, I'll talk a little 

17 bit more about that. 

18 And then once we have a rough idea 

19 of the stock and the shipments that are going 

20 on now, we can look at market growth rates for 

21 the next 30 years of the analysis period. And 

22 then we do this analysis for each of the very 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 265

1 many possible combinations of equipment 

2 classes, efficiency levels, and so on. 

3 So we used two data sources to 

4 look at the currently installed base of walk5 ins. The Commercial Building Energy 

6 Consumption Survey, which is the survey that 

7 provides quite good information about the 

8 number of appliances and the type of 

9 appliances that buildings use. But has a 

10 relatively small sample size. I think it is 

11 about 5,000 buildings. 

12 And so from that we are able to 

13 say on average, for different types, such as 

14 for grocery store or convenience store, how 

15 many walk-ins are there per building. 

16 And then as a separate data 

17 source, we look at the U.S. Economic Census 

18 and the U.S. Agricultural Census to know the 

19 number of buildings of these various types, 

20 how many convenience stores are there? How 

21 many grocery stores? We use the Ag census 

22 because dairy farms are one user of walk-ins 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 266

1 so we need that information as well. 

2 Once we have numbers on the stock, 

3 we apportion it by various types, including by 

4 equipment classes. This equipment class 

5 information is -- I guess it is a little hard 

6 to see the bottom there -- oh, yes, you can 

7 see it -- so we have about two million 

8 envelopes that we see as of the year 2007 as 

9 the installed base in America. And then from 

10 that, we apportion it into the different 

11 equipment classes here. This is just so far 

12 the envelopes. 

13 And this is very much a process, 

14 this next step, of DOE estimation. So the way 

15 that this was estimated is that we took our 

16 best guess, really, after talking to some 

17 manufacturers about what a typical set up 

18 might be for a convenience store, what sorts 

19 of walk ins bight be typical in a grocery. 

20 And then since we knew the number 

21 of each type of establishment, we added those 

22 guesses really up to get a sense of the spread 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 267

1 of different equipment classes in the market. 

2 And in addition to envelopes, we did that for 

3 refrigeration systems. 

4 You can see the total for 

5 envelopes and refrigeration systems is the 

6 same because they are paired in a one-to-one 

7 ratio. And we have the estimates of the 

8 spread of equipment classes there. 

9 So I believe this is getting back 

10 to Harmon's point on where the numbers came 

11 from on different types and the ratios. And 

12 DOE would very much welcome any input on these 

13 numbers, especially these spreads. 

14 MR. BROOKMAN: Mike? 

15 MR. STRAUB: Mike Straub. 

16 You said that there is a one-to17 one ratio between refrigeration systems and 

18 envelopes. What did you base that on? 

19 MR. McCORMICK: Yes, I should 

20 clarify that when we talk about a 

21 refrigeration system in this context, we mean 

22 all the refrigeration going into the envelope. 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 268

1 MR. STRAUB: Okay. So it would be 

2 multiple units. 

3 MR. McCORMICK: Yes. Sorry, I 

4 should have clarified. 

5 MR. STRAUB: And then what was the 

6 basis for multiplex being so high considering 

7 that the sweet spot of this refrigeration in 

8 envelopes would be really in the direct 

9 condensing, smaller horsepower stuff? That's 

10 more -- multiplex you'd see in supermarkets, 

11 which isn't 30-some-odd percent of the market, 

12 the boxes that get sold. 

13 MR. BROOKMAN: What would you 

14 suggest that number be, Mike? 

15 MR. STRAUB: I would think that 

16 the 30 percent would be more in line with the 

17 direct condensing spread across the outdoor. 

18 MR. BROOKMAN: Well, what about 

19 multiplex condensing? 

20 MR. STRAUB: I wouldn't think it 

21 would be more than 15 percent. 

22 MR. BROOKMAN: Okay. And that's 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 269

1 based on what you know to be supermarkets? 

2 MR. STRAUB: Supermarkets. 

3 MR. BROOKMAN: Okay. Thank you. 

4 MR. McCORMICK: Thank you. 

5 MR. BROOKMAN: Yes, Harmon? 

6 MR. LEWIS: Harmon, American 

7 Panel. 

8 This chart goes in direct conflict 

9 with your Table 3.2.8 that shows multiplex 

10 statements at ten-to-one over dedicated. And 

11 here you only show them at 46 percent. 

12 So it would versus dedicated ought 

13 to be one-to-one. So something is just wrong. 

14 MR. McCORMICK: Thank you for that 

15 but I can't answer off the top of my head what 

16 that would about. But we're very interested 

17 in looking at that further. 

18 MR. BROOKMAN: Well, what -- among 

19 those numbers, what would you choose? 

20 MR. LEWIS: Well, what I'm saying 

21 is if multiplex here is 46 percent, which 

22 people that make those units say that's even 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 270

1 too high, that's about half, then you'd sell 

2 one dedicated to one multiplex, not ten 

3 multiplex to one dedicated in the Table 3.2.8. 

4 They'd be about equal sales. It just doesn't 

5 seem right. 

6 MS. GAGNE: I don't have a firm 

7 answer for you, Harmon, but -- Claire Gagne -- 

8 but one distinction to make sure we keep in 

9 mind is that this right now is stock, not 

10 shipments. They are quite distinct. 

11 MR. BROOKMAN: Jon? Jon? Let's 

12 hear from another manufacturer. 

13 MR. McHUGH: Okay, sure. That's 

14 fine. 

15 MR. BROOKMAN: Yes, Mike, go 

16 ahead. And then I'll return to you. 

17 MR. STRAUB: Just a quick 

18 clarification, what is stock? 

19 MR. McHUGH: That's what I was 

20 wondering. 

21 MS. GAGNE: Currently installed. 

22 MR. STRAUB: Installed, okay. 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 271

1 MR. BROOKMAN: Okay, Jon, please. 

2 MR. McHUGH: Just to clarify, when 

3 you say envelope stock, is that individual 

4 walk-ins or is that individual buildings 

5 containing walk-ins? 

6 MS. GAGNE: We meant it to mean 

7 individual walk-ins. We understand that there 

8 are certain constructions where a freezer and 

9 a cooler may be joined at a panel. 

10 MR. BROOKMAN: Okay. Dave, did 

11 you want to add something here? 

12 MR. WINIARSKI: No. 

13 MR. BROOKMAN: Okay. 

14 MR. WINIARSKI: But I have a quick 

15 clarifying question. 

16 MR. BROOKMAN: Dave Winiarski. 

17 MR. WINIARSKI: Yes, Gavin, I 

18 don't know if you will be able to answer this 

19 off the top of your head. When we talk about 

20 refrigeration stock, in the development of 

21 that, is that representative of individual 

22 units? Or is it something more like BTUs of 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 272

1 capacity of units? 

2 MR. McCORMICK: Thank you for that 

3 clarifying question. And the answer is that 

4 when we talk about both envelopes and 

5 refrigeration systems here, as Claire was 

6 starting to get at, we're talking about for 

7 any a single walk-in any refrigeration 

8 equipment associated with that we would call 

9 one refrigeration system. So it is a separate 

10 question from how many BTU are we looking at 

11 in the market. And I suppose even multiple 

12 refrigeration systems attached to multiple 

13 walk-ins. We are counting how many walk-ins' 

14 worth of refrigeration is in the market. 

15 Is that a useful clarifying 

16 answer? 

17 MR. WINIARSKI: It may be for the 

18 manufacturers. 

19 MR. BROOKMAN: I thought so. And 

20 speaking of clarifications, Harmon got us 

21 started with multiplex condensing. 

22 I'd really like to get some 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 273

1 additional comments on the numbers here, on 

2 the percentage of the stock as represented by 

3 these different classes. 

4 Yes, Daryl? 

5 MR. ERBS: My reaction is the 

6 direct condensing indoors seems low to me. 

7 MR. BROOKMAN: But what would it 

8 be, Daryl? 

9 MR. ERBS: Well, I don't have 

10 data. 

11 MR. BROOKMAN: Give us a range. 

12 MR. ERBS: But I would think it 

13 would be in the high single digits at least 

14 just based on a lot of the smaller boxes are 

15 going into, you know, mom and pop and -- well, 

16 of course they put theirs outside sometimes. 

17 But there are a lot of individual 

18 boxes and little refrigeration systems. And 

19 typically those people are so first cost 

20 focused that they buy an indoor unit because 

21 it is the lowest cost option. 

22 So that looks a little low to me. 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 274

1 And I don't know that it is 15 percent. But 

2 I think it might be closer to ten. 

3 MR. BROOKMAN: Yes? Okay. 

4 And then any other comments on 

5 what you see represented in this table? 

6 MR. LEWIS: Doug, I've got one. 

7 Harmon. 

8 The NAFEM, through Service 

9 Equipment Manufacturers Association, ask us 

10 these questions each year, not broken by 

11 display and non-display but between numbers of 

12 coolers and freezers and how much 

13 refrigeration we've sold. And we've reported 

14 that -- I've been there 32 years and I do that 

15 report every year. 

16 So if you went to them, they may 

17 be able to give you some numbers that might be 

18 closer to validating some of the 

19 distributions. 

20 MR. BROOKMAN: That's good. 

21 MR. LEWIS: They won't know 

22 between display and non-display. But it will 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 275

1 give you a spectrum. 

2 But I'd figure 70 percent cooler 

3 to 30 percent freezer is a historical number 

4 that I couldn't disagree with. I think that's 

5 in line. But again, the multiplex isn't in 

6 our experience but Heatcraft and Russell, the 

7 people that make both types of systems could 

8 comment on that maybe to you in the time 

9 period. 

10 MR. BROOKMAN: Well, would you 

11 expect it on condensing? If I add those 

12 numbers up, I think they add to 54 percent. 

13 Do you think that's in the right -- 

14 MR. LEWIS: Well, 54 and 46, yes. 

15 But our experience would be, as was mentioned 

16 earlier, that the multiplex, the 31 there 

17 seems real high. Those adding to 46, maybe 

18 you ought to add to 30 and the direct ones add 

19 to the other because there are lots more 

20 restaurants than supermarkets. 

21 MR. BROOKMAN: Yes, okay. These 

22 are very helpful comments. Any other comments 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 276

1 on this slide before we move on? 

2 (No reply.) 

3 MR. BROOKMAN: Okay. Let's do 

4 that. 

5 MR. McCORMICK: So the next step 

6 once we know the number of units that are in 

7 use in the market at any given time is to 

8 estimate what shipments would be required to 

9 lead to that. Now ideally we would also have 

10 information on the number of shipments 

11 nationwide. And, once again, we welcome any 

12 data that you would like to provide on 

13 shipments. 

14 And in the absence of that, our 

15 current approach is to look at the replacement 

16 rates for different units and to calculate the 

17 shipments from that. So on a very high level 

18 here, the assumption is that if you had to 

19 replace about ten percent of the units a year, 

20 there would be about ten times as -- the stock 

21 would be about ten times as large as the 

22 shipments. 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 277

1 And here is an illustrative 

2 example. So for the envelopes, we're just 

3 showing in this chart that the replacement 

4 rate directly affects the number of shipments 

5 that DOE would estimate in the absence of 

6 actual shipments data since we now have stock 

7 data. 

8 So here we're seeing that if five 

9 percent of walk-ins have to be replaced every 

10 year, the envelopes, and you have about two 

11 million walk-ins in the installed base, you 

12 would expect to see about 100,000 units 

13 shipped a year. And the five percent number 

14 is the assumption that DOE actually did use. 

15 It comes out to about 20 years. 

16 A hypothetical might be ten 

17 percent. And we're just showing in this case 

18 what that would mean in terms of the 

19 shipments. So that's envelopes. 

20 And then for refrigeration 

21 systems, we assume a shorter lifetime or a 

22 more rapid replacement rate, which would mean 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 278

1 that to get the same amount of stock, to have 

2 the same number of refrigeration systems as 

3 envelopes, you would need many more shipments 

4 per year because they are breaking more often 

5 or being replaced more often. 

6 I'm seeing a confused look or two. 

7 Is there anything I can clarify before we go 

8 on? 

9 (No response.) 

10 MR. McCORMICK: Okay. So at this 

11 time, we would love any input on either the 

12 historical shipments or the information that 

13 we use to estimate that, which is the average 

14 lifetime. So because the shipments are 

15 directly related to the lifetimes, we would 

16 welcome comment on either of those at this 

17 time. 

18 MR. BROOKMAN: Charlie Stephens? 

19 MR. STEPHENS: Charlie Stephens. 

20 MR. BROOKMAN: Why don't you take 

21 us back to the preceding slide, could you, 78? 

22 MR. STEPHENS: Yes, just a 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 279

1 clarifying question. When you say 

2 refrigeration shipments, you're talking about 

3 whole systems, which might consist of multiple 

4 compressors and unit coolers for a single box, 

5 right? 

6 MR. McCORMICK: Yes, that's what 

7 we're talking about, thank you. 

8 MR. STEPHENS: Okay. Thanks. 

9 MR. BROOKMAN: Can we verify the 

10 numbers here? 

11 MS. GAGNE: I would -- this is 

12 Claire Gagne -- I would add maybe not such a 

13 focus on the number exactly but the order of 

14 magnitude or a rough estimation. We 

15 understand that at least for the envelope 

16 manufacturers, a lot of you may calculate your 

17 shipments in board feet. And so it is not a 

18 direct transfer to units. 

19 But perhaps you have some 

20 understanding of how this would look when put 

21 into a unit scale and aggregated across the 

22 industry. 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 280

1 MR. BROOKMAN: Karim, does AHRI 

2 aggregate this data? 

3 DR. AMRANE: Karim Amrane. 

4 Unfortunately not. So we don't have any 

5 shipment data. 

6 MR. BROOKMAN: Okay. Thank you. 

7 Is that in the ballpark? 2007 

8 stock, 2,010,000? Don't know? Hard to say. 

9 Scaled by ten times. 

10 MR. LLENZA: This is Charlie 

11 Llenza, Department of Energy. 

12 Again, we were struggling trying 

13 to find information. So if anybody can at 

14 least point us in the right directions, we're 

15 good to get out. 

16 MR. BROOKMAN: Are there other 

17 data sources, for example, Charlie? 

18 MR. STEPHENS: Yes. Have you guys 

19 looked at the NAFEM data? N-A-F-E-M? 

20 MR. McCORMICK: I don't believe 

21 so. 

22 Gopal, can you comment? Or 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 281

1 Claire? 

2 DR. BANDYOPADHYAY: I haven't 

3 looked at it yet, no. 

4 MR. McCORMICK: I don't think so. 

5 That's very helpful. Thank you. 

6 MR. LLENZA: Okay. I think more 

7 than just telling us NAFEM has data is 

8 actually to provide us a point of contact or a 

9 reference document or -- 

10 MR. STEPHENS: Why don't I just 

11 ship you what I have? I've been using it not 

12 necessarily for walk-ins but for other kinds 

13 of commercial refrigeration equipment. But 

14 the walk-ins were definitely in there. 

15 The one thing that is in there is 

16 that there is only a certain fraction of the 

17 manufacturers for any given piece of equipment 

18 that actually report. And then they estimate 

19 based on market share was best they understand 

20 it as to what the total shipments might be. 

21 So it is still an estimate but at 

22 least in some categories, a fairly big 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 282

1 fraction is reported shipments. And as was 

2 pointed out earlier by Harmon, it's not broken 

3 down the way you might like to see it but it 

4 can definitely, I think, get you an order of 

5 magnitude that would ground you. And I think 

6 it goes back far enough so you can get a 

7 picture over time. At least it does that for 

8 me, so -- 

9 MR. BROOKMAN: Jon, California has 

10 typically got data on many things that others 

11 do not. Do they have? 

12 MR. McHUGH: This is something we 

13 don't have data on. We have information from 

14 the various efficiency programs. And we're 

15 trying to do our own estimates for our 

16 rulemaking proceeding. 

17 We'd be happy to share any and all 

18 of that information. 

19 MR. BROOKMAN: And I'm looking at 

20 the average replacement rate, 15 percent, in 

21 this table. And I'm asking the manufacturers 

22 can you -- does that fit? Is that a 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 283

1 reasonable number from your perspective? 

2 Harmon? 

3 MR. LEWIS: Yes, Harmon, American 

4 Panel. 

5 Most end users aren't going to 

6 come back to us if they need to replace the 

7 compressor or the condensing unit once it is 

8 out of the five-year warranty period. So we 

9 won't necessarily know. 

10 Similarly within the walk-ins, 

11 unless our computer system kicks out that we 

12 made that walk-ins 18 years ago or whatever, 

13 when somebody says I need a walk-in for this 

14 school or this restaurant, we don't know if it 

15 is original equipment or a replacement at the 

16 time we build it necessarily. So it's hard to 

17 say. 

18 Now we do know for chains, things 

19 of that nature. That yes, 15 years on the 

20 walk-ins is a reasonable number. That makes 

21 sense. 

22 As I mentioned earlier on 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 284

1 replacement doors though, we're only replacing 

2 five percent of annual shipment numbers of our 

3 doors. And most people they are going to have 

4 to come back to us for the door to fit the 

5 walk-in because my door is like Manitowoc, not 

6 like Nor-Lak or Kysor's. And their doors 

7 don't fit our frame either. But that's 

8 numbers I looked up last week. 

9 MR. BROOKMAN: What about 

10 refrigeration systems? 

11 MR. LEWIS: Again, we don't have a 

12 way to know because they don't come to us. 

13 MR. BROOKMAN: Mike? 

14 MR. STRAUB: About half of our 

15 business goes to wholesale distribution. And 

16 once it gets there, we have really no idea 

17 where it goes because the contractor can buy 

18 it for a new installation or they could be 

19 buying it for a replacement. So we really 

20 don't have any good data for that. 

21 MR. BROOKMAN: I see. But their 

22 shipment rates, they're not -- that stuff is 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 285

1 not sitting on their shelf for more than a 

2 year, is it? 

3 MR. STRAUB: Oh, no. 

4 MR. BROOKMAN: Right. 

5 MR. STRAUB: I mean it can be just 

6 replenishing their inventory at a wholesaler. 

7 And then, you know, a contractor comes in and 

8 buys the equipment. He may be doing a new 

9 installation or he may be replacing equipment 

10 at an installation. 

11 MR. BROOKMAN: Okay, okay. Is 

12 that in the ballpark though? Fifteen percent? 

13 PARTICIPANT: I have no idea. 

14 MR. BROOKMAN: You don't know, 

15 okay. 

16 Claire? 

17 MS. GAGNE: Claire Gagne. Just 

18 getting quickly back to what you mentioned. 

19 I'd like to make a clarification about the 

20 term replacement rate at least from the 

21 context of envelopes, we select that 

22 terminology to capture the idea that 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 286

1 envelopes, unlike a mechanical system, don't 

2 necessarily fail. At least they may fail from 

3 an energy perspective but you couldn't 

4 necessarily tell that from looking at them. 

5 So really what we're interested in 

6 with that number is getting a sense of what an 

7 average lifetime might look like. And just 

8 anecdotally, I understand that there are end 

9 users who have walk-ins of 38, 40, 45 years 

10 still on the market functioning, you know, in 

11 a sense that they still hold product. 

12 So information to that extent 

13 would be very useful for the envelopes. We 

14 understand that it is not quite as cut and dry 

15 as a mechanical piece stopping its function. 

16 MR. BROOKMAN: Okay. Yes, Fred? 

17 MR. MINELLI: I think it depends 

18 more on the application for the replacements. 

19 And if you are driving lift trucks in and out 

20 of a large walk-in every day, those 

21 replacement cycles are eight to ten years. 

22 If you're using pallet jacks, 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 287

1 which is typical in supermarkets, you're still 

2 in eight to ten years. But if you are walking 

3 in and out or maybe hand trucks, you are going 

4 to last a lot longer. 

5 MR. BROOKMAN: Kenny? 

6 MR. OWEN: In my opinion, I think 

7 the replacement rate is quite high. I don't -

8 - we ship a good bit of what I call repair 

9 items. But to say the whole is going to be 

10 replaced twice as often as the envelope, I 

11 think that's probably at least twice as high 

12 as it really ought to be. 

13 I think it is more comparable to 

14 the life of the envelope. Will they replace a 

15 compressor on five percent of the units in ten 

16 years? Yes. But it won't be the complete 

17 system being replaced. It will be just mainly 

18 one component. 

19 MR. BROOKMAN: Thank you. 

20 Okay, we're going to press on 

21 here. 

22 MR. McCORMICK: So the next item 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 288

1 here is much more speculative. So I'm sure 

2 there is a little bit less comment we can get 

3 on this but just to touch on the future growth 

4 of the industry. 

5 We have assumed that this is a 

6 mature market. And so one thing you often see 

7 in mature markets is that as the number of 

8 establishments that use this product grow, the 

9 size of the market will grow. 

10 So if there are two percent more 

11 restaurants next year, you might expect to see 

12 two percent more walk-ins. So we have used 

13 this assumption for the preliminary analysis, 

14 looking at the growth rate of actually square 

15 footage of buildings in America and they will 

16 likely grow over the next years. And using 

17 that as our first cut at the growth rate of 

18 this market. 

19 But one reason this is worth 

20 highlighting is that we have noticed in the 

21 few years that we do have data for in the 

22 stock, it appeared that this market was not 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 289

1 really growing. We were seeing .1 percent 

2 growth rates. 

3 So here is a little illustrative 

4 graph. The preliminary analysis assumptions 

5 we do make about the future growth of the 

6 industry are the blue line you see here. It 

7 is about 1.6 percent growth per year. Just 

8 the same as the growth in establishments that 

9 use walk-ins nationwide. 

10 But if the couple of years that we 

11 have data for are representative, possibly the 

12 market is not really growing. The red line 

13 you see here is a .1 percent growth rate, 

14 which is what we saw between 1993 -- 1997 and 

15 2007. 

16 So we would welcome any comment on 

17 did something happen in those particular 

18 years? Is it expected that this market will 

19 have no growth? Is it expected that there 

20 will be any particularly dramatic events 

21 effecting the future growth or lack therefor 

22 of this market? 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 290

1 MR. BROOKMAN: Surely someone does 

2 these forecasts, right? Yes? Harmon? 

3 MR. LEWIS: Yes, Harmon, American 

4 Panel, my standard of living is based on a ten 

5 percent growth. And so I don't know if that -

6 - I don't think that we're at one percent 

7 growth. But, you know, our company has been 

8 growing at ten percent for the last ten years. 

9 So we've doubled in size over that time. 

10 And I don't know if it is market 

11 share or what, we don't worry about that. We 

12 worry about -- 

13 MS. GAGNE: Okay. 

14 MR. LEWIS: -- what do we make at 

15 the end of the year. 

16 MS. GAGNE: -- Claire Gagne. That 

17 would be my follow-up question is whether you 

18 think that that trend applies across the 

19 industry or whether other market players are 

20 dropping out and you are taking their, you 

21 know, the business slack that they leave, et 

22 cetera? 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 291

1 MR. LEWIS: Again, I think NAFEM's 

2 number, and again, theirs is based on whoever 

3 responds, but it would be a bigger picture of 

4 walk-ins in that they would have that going 

5 back for many years. But probably the last 

6 ten years is the only thing that makes any 

7 sense. 

8 MR. BROOKMAN: Charlie Stephens? 

9 MR. STEPHENS: Charlie Stephens. 

10 At the risk of, you know, being a 

11 heretic here, but part of my work has to do 

12 with macroeconomics. And this kind of 

13 forecasting. 

14 And I'd be surprised to see much 

15 of any growth over the next ten years anyway. 

16 I think much of the growth we're seen, 

17 according to all the sources I've been able to 

18 gather, is largely due to an enormous credit 

19 bubble, which I think we understand is kind of 

20 imploding about now. 

21 And so I would be very cautious 

22 about using growth rates beyond more than 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 292

1 about one percent given the circumstances that 

2 I think we're in financially right now. 

3 Outside of Wall Street. 

4 MR. WINIARSKI: Thank you. 

5 Okay. Final comments on this 

6 slide? 

7 (No response.) 

8 MR. McCORMICK: Okay. And so one 

9 more slide in the shipments analysis is the 

10 distribution of different sizes. So we've 

11 already seen, I believe -- yes, if you want to 

12 turn back to slide 32, you might be interested 

13 to see the breakdown of different sizes for 

14 our equipment classes. 

15 And here is just the Department's 

16 estimates of how many of each size we're 

17 looking at. So as I believe Eric already 

18 mentioned, the most useful way that in a 

19 perfect world we could get our data would be 

20 to know the different shares of many different 

21 sizes so we could sort of characterize the 

22 market overall. 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 293

1 But any comments on just this 

2 either rough assumption or sizes in general 

3 would be very welcome in written form or right 

4 now off the top of your head, either one would 

5 be wonderful. 

6 (No response.) 

7 MR. BROOKMAN: It's -- what do you 

8 think? Comments? Harmon? 

9 MR. LEWIS: Yes, I'll send you 

10 those statistics. It probably won't be next 

11 week. Maybe that week after. But we could 

12 pull them. 

13 But I would think the large being 

14 twice the number of small wouldn't be 

15 accurate for walk-ins the food service 

16 spectrum. Those numbers would probably be 

17 reversed more. 

18 MR. BROOKMAN: Really? 

19 MR. LEWIS: But I can pull out the 

20 historical stuff. 

21 MR. BROOKMAN: Okay. Thank you. 

22 MR. McCORMICK: Thank you. 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 294

1 MR. BROOKMAN: Okay. Other 

2 comments on the share of shipments? 

3 (No response.) 

4 MR. BROOKMAN: I'm going to 

5 suggest we take a short break. It's three 

6 o'clock. We're still -- I think somewhere 

7 between a half an hour and 45 minutes behind. 

8 I think we still have the capacity to catch 

9 that up and get out of here before dark. 

10 So let's take a ten-minute break. 

11 Don't go far. If you're going to find a 

12 vending machine, do it quickly. And we'll 

13 resume at 3:15. 

14 We're making good progress. And I 

15 really appreciate the quality of the comments. 

16 We're really getting a lot of good 

17 information here today. 

18 See you back here to start at 

19 3:15. 

20 (Whereupon, the foregoing matter went off the 

21 record at 3:05 p.m. and went back 

22 on the record at 3:15 p.m.) 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 295

1 MR. BROOKMAN: We're going to 

2 proceed. We're on National Impact Analysis, 

3 and we're back with Gavin McCormick. 

4 MR. McCORMICK: Thanks. So, the 

5 National Impact Analysis, I promise, will be a 

6 little quicker. It is, essentially, the life7 cycle cost information for one walk-in times 

8 the number of walk-ins that you're talking 

9 about, so it's a little bit of a crude 

10 characterization, but, basically, we've gone 

11 from looking at one walk-in, the financial 

12 impacts, to the nationwide impacts, once 

13 you've added up all 2 million per year. 

14 So, there's two different outputs 

15 of the National Impact Analysis, the National 

16 Energy Savings, which is simply if you look at 

17 the energy savings from going to more 

18 efficient walk-ins, times the number of walk19 ins that you're talking about, you can look at 

20 a Nationwide Energy Savings. And the next 

21 step is the Net Present Value. A word of 

22 clarification here. We often find people get 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 296

1 a little confused because Net Present Value 

2 often means in a cost benefit context all of 

3 the costs and benefits of switching to this 

4 rule. And, in this context, this is the Net 

5 Present Value just to consumers of walk-ins. 

6 So, you could imagine this rule, for example, 

7 might have environmental benefits, and those 

8 are not included in this Net Present Value. 

9 This is the cost savings, if any, of going to 

10 more efficient walk-ins for consumers. So, for 

11 the National Energy Savings, just a quick 

12 little diagram here. You can look from the 

13 shipments analysis, you know the number of 

14 units, the stock, and you know the energy 

15 savings for each unit. You can multiply those 

16 to get the National Energy Savings. 

17 A similar thing is going on for 

18 Net Present Value. In the shipments analysis, 

19 you know how many of these things there are, 

20 and of what type. You can look over on the 

21 right here, we have the total equipment cost 

22 increase, if increase, in fact, of going to 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 297

1 more efficient equipment. And over on the 

2 left, we have the operating cost savings. 

3 Again, we're just adding up walk-ins that use 

4 less electricity given the price of 

5 electricity and things, how many dollars does 

6 that come to saved. 

7 So, key inputs here are various 

8 different numbers from the previous analyses. 

9 The Shipments Analysis tells how many walk-ins 

10 are we expecting to see in each year, both in 

11 terms of the number shipped, which affects 

12 what you spend on them, and the number in use, 

13 which affects how much electricity you're 

14 spending on them each year. And then other 

15 electricity cost information from the Life16 Cycle Cost Analysis I covered a moment ago, 

17 and other cost information like that. 

18 Here we use discount rates, again, 

19 but one thing to clarify is that the National 

20 Impact Analysis takes place, because it is not 

21 from the point of view of one consumer, it's 

22 from the point of view of all of society. 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 298

1 Those consumers will not, necessarily, have 

2 the same preference for money now versus 

3 benefits later, as all of society, so 

4 consistent with the Office of Management and 

5 Budget's guidance, we use a straight 7 percent 

6 and 3 percent discount rate in this analysis. 

7 So, it's a different discount rate from the 

8 Life-Cycle Cost Analysis. And what that is 

9 being applied to is any shipments in the 

10 future that cost more because units are more 

11 efficient, that extra money is discounted. 

12 Any cost savings that occur in the future, 

13 that's discounted. And, actually, any energy 

14 savings that occur in the future by DOE 

15 Standard Procedure are discounted, as well. 

16 So, I'm going to present to you the energy 

17 savings discounted over time. 

18 We also use site-to-source 

19 conversion factors. Walk-ins obviously run on 

20 electricity, but what this rule is really 

21 looking at is saving source energy, such as 

22 the coal that you burn to get electricity, so 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 299

1 we do an analysis of how much coal, natural 

2 gas, and so on, energy is turned into the 

3 electricity we use. So, what you essentially 

4 do is you multiply the electricity by a number 

5 to get the primary energy savings. 

6 Two inputs that do not factor 

7 importantly in this analysis, but it's worth 

8 pointing out, because they do for other 

9 products. HVAC interactions, you can imagine 

10 that more efficient equipment might interact 

11 differently with the cooling of the building, 

12 or the heating of the building. In our 

13 analysis, we found that this was not a 

14 terribly significant effect in the case of 

15 walk-ins, so for the preliminary analysis, we 

16 assumed no change in interactions with HVAC 

17 systems for more efficient equipment in walk18 ins. 

19 And a second factor that sometimes 

20 matters is the rebound effect. More efficient 

21 equipment, which costs less to use, people 

22 might use more. So, a common example is a 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 300

1 thermostat that -- excuse me, a house that you 

2 can heat more efficiently, you might turn up 

3 the heat and be a little bit more comfortable 

4 because it's cheaper. We assume that in the 

5 case of walk-ins that doesn't apply, because 

6 you have health and safety reasons for 

7 maintaining a particular temperature at all 

8 times. You're not going to use it more 

9 because it's more efficient, you're going to 

10 use it the same amount. So, we assume that 

11 these two factors do not have any significant 

12 impact in this analysis. 

13 Any comments on this right here, 

14 the HVAC interactions, or rebound factors? 

15 MR. MANOLE: I'm not sure what 

16 will be the impact, but, after all, if you 

17 have a better insulation and have less heat 

18 going through the walls in the walk-in, all 

19 that heat will have still to go to the air 

20 conditioning, so we're not going to place that 

21 load on the refrigeration system of the walk22 in freezer, but that load will go to the air 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 301

1 conditioning. So, overall, the building is 

2 not going to save much. 

3 MR. McCORMICK: Thank you. And we 

4 will look at this more also for the NOPR 

5 stage. 

6 MR. BROOKMAN: For the record, 

7 that was Dan. Go ahead. 

8 MR. LLENZA: Charles Llenza, 

9 Department of Energy. We look at that, and 

10 also you'll end up in winter, that heat will 

11 end up heating your building, so it's usually 

12 offsetting. That's what we found in the past, 

13 so it all depends on how much of a delta it 

14 is, but I don't think it's going to matter 

15 much at the end of the day because of that. 

16 MR. BROOKMAN: Okay. 

17 MR. McCORMICK: As with the Life18 Cycle Cost Analysis, there are too many 

19 scenarios to characterize easily here, so this 

20 is one attempt at a summary statistic to tell 

21 the whole story. And, again, these are 

22 preliminary numbers for the whole preliminary 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 302

1 analysis. But what this graph is showing is 

2 two things at once, the National Energy 

3 Savings, and also the Net Present Value. So, 

4 this summary statistic says what are the 

5 greatest energy savings you can get while 

6 still saving consumer's money, instead of 

7 costing them extra money over the long term? 

8 So, the numbers that you see presented are the 

9 National Energy Savings that you might see at 

10 each different efficiency level. 

11 So, if, hypothetically, DOE were 

12 to require the maximum possible efficiency 

13 level for both types of equipment, you would 

14 get 0.54 quads of energy saved per year, 

15 excuse me, not per year, that's over the 

16 analysis period. That would be the savings 

17 for this equipment class. But that would be, 

18 likely, very costly, so the colored squares 

19 you see here are the cases in which the Net 

20 Present Value is greater than zero. So, if 

21 you want the full technical details in the 

22 TSD, we actually show each and every scenario, 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 303

1 what are the NES numbers, and the NPV numbers. 

2 And this graph is just attempting to show 

3 simultaneously that if you only look at the 

4 colored squares, these are the squares in 

5 which -- the scenarios in which you have 

6 positive cost impacts overall, so you might 

7 want to talk about the greatest energy savings 

8 you can get of those, which is the -- we've 

9 highlighted that orange just for clarity. 

10 MR. BROOKMAN: Jon McHugh. 

11 MR. McHUGH: So, when you say the 

12 Net Present Value is greater than equal to 

13 zero, are you actually going back up the J14 curve? It's not the maximum life cycle cost 

15 savings, but rather the life cycle cost 

16 savings is zero, essentially, to get to that--

17 the maximum energy savings to get to a life 

18 cycle savings equal to zero? 

19 MR. McCORMICK: Yes. This is not 

20 the point with the highest life cycle cost 

21 savings. This is the last positive. 

22 MR. McHUGH: Thank you. 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 304

1 MR. McCORMICK: Again, our results 

2 are preliminary, but we thought it was worth 

3 showing one slide, in that many of our 

4 equipment classes with the current set of 

5 assumptions, this particular summary statistic 

6 would actually imply that you are looking at 

7 the very maximum efficiency level. So, for 

8 this equipment class, Medium Non-Display 

9 Coolers with large dedicated indoor 

10 refrigeration system, we saw that in all but a 

11 few cases you have a net savings of money 

12 nationwide over the 30-year analysis period. 

13 So, assuming it is - well, it's accurate to 

14 all our assumptions, then you would be looking 

15 at saving the most energy, and enough money in 

16 the maximum case here. So, this is analogous 

17 to the slide we saw a little bit earlier that 

18 Rebecca showed on Slide 42, and this is 

19 getting back to how we are not seeing dramatic 

20 cost increases at the highest efficiency 

21 levels for some products. 

22 Just a quick summary of some of 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 305

1 the results from the National Impact Analysis. 

2 We often are looking at very high efficiency 

3 level combinations giving us this summary 

4 statistic of the highest energy savings, still 

5 save some money. And, occasionally, it's even 

6 at the maximum level. We're seeing a little 

7 more variation in the Net Present Value than 

8 the National Energy Savings. In almost every 

9 case, more efficiency means higher energy 

10 savings. That part is obvious. 

11 And the bottom line, also, is that 

12 we are looking at considerable savings for 

13 this equipment class. This is looking at 13 

14 quads of energy saved over the 30-year 

15 analysis period, if you discount it at 3 

16 percent a year, and tens of billions of 

17 dollars. So, assuming that all our 

18 engineering assumptions are accurate, and we 

19 will, of course, be revising at least some of 

20 them, I'm sure, that's the kind of savings 

21 we're looking at over the analysis period. 

22 MR. BROOKMAN: So, comments on 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 306

1 these last few slides? And, perhaps, the 

2 results, as well. Yes, Joanna. 

3 MS. MAUER: Joanna Mauer. I 

4 didn't see the undiscounted quads reported 

5 anywhere in the GSD. Is that something that 

6 will be reported at the NOPR stage, the 

7 undiscounted - 

8 MR. McCORMICK: We certainly can 

9 provide that, yes. 

10 MR. BROOKMAN: Thank you. 

11 MR. McHUGH: I'll just make a 

12 similar comment, that units of energy, you 

13 really can't discount them. It's a financial 

14 tool, so it doesn't really make sense to 

15 discount quads. 

16 MR. McCORMICK: Thank you for your 

17 comment. 

18 MR. BROOKMAN: Okay. 

19 MR. McCORMICK: This was the 

20 comment about discounting energy savings over 

21 time. Would you like to repeat it? 

22 MR. McHUGH: Yes, because it's a 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 307

1 financial tool. It doesn't have any physical 

2 sense related to energy. 

3 MR. CYMBALSKY: Well, I mean, one 

4 quad of energy now is one quad of energy in 

5 2035. Right? 

6 (Off mic comment.) 

7 MR. CYMBALSKY: I'm sorry. I 

8 thought we only discounted the financial part 

9 of this, but I'm not - 

10 MR. McCORMICK: Charlie, do you 

11 want to repeat that, or should - 

12 MR. LLENZA: Are we discounting 

13 this because of the OMB guidance? Is that 

14 what we're doing? 

15 MR. McCORMICK: Yes, that's right. 

16 MR. LLENZA: Okay. So, this is --

17 that's why we're discounting it. And while it 

18 doesn't, necessarily, make sense to everybody, 

19 it makes sense to OMB. 

20 MR. BROOKMAN: Joanna asked the 

21 initial question. Go ahead, Joanna. 

22 MS. MAUER: Well, just to - in 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 308

1 other TSDs that I've looked at, they report 

2 the discounted quads, but also the 

3 undiscounted quads, so I don't, necessarily, 

4 have a problem with reporting the discounted 

5 quads, but I'd request the undiscounted quads. 

6 MR. BROOKMAN: Okay. We got that. 

7 MR. McCORMICK: And next I'm 

8 turning over to Rebecca. Thank you. 

9 MR. BROOKMAN: A few individuals 

10 approached me at the break wanting to make 

11 sure we did get to test procedures, and we 

12 will, so hang in there. We're going to get to 

13 test procedures. Rebecca. 

14 MS. LEGETT: Yes, this is Rebecca. 

15 I'm going to be presenting the last two 

16 sections, Sections 6 and 7. Section 6 is very 

17 brief. I'm going to try to get through it 

18 very briefly, and then move on to some of the 

19 test procedures used and try to get those in. 

20 So, first I'm going to talk really 

21 quickly about our methodology for the 

22 Manufacturer Impact Analysis. We did a 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 309

1 preliminary Manufacturer Impact Analysis for 

2 this phase before now, and before the NOPR 

3 we'll be conducting the actual MIA, it's 

4 called. And the purpose is to assess the 

5 impacts of these new standards on -- any new 

6 standards that DOE sets on manufacturers, 

7 manufacturer subgroups -- examining cumulative 

8 regulatory burden on the industry. This is 

9 other rules, such as other health and safety, 

10 sanitation, other rules that the industry 

11 might have to follow that could create a 

12 cumulative burden. This is where we consider 

13 them. 

14 So, DOE's methodology for 

15 quantifying the impact is to analyze industry 

16 cash flow and NPV through a Government 

17 Regulatory Impact Model, or GRIM, and then 

18 conduct interviews with manufacturers to 

19 refine the inputs to the GRIM, and develop 

20 other analyses. And these are the outputs. 

21 So, very brief survey of the methodology. The 

22 pre-analysis was Phase One, and part of Phase 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 310

1 Two. And part of Phase One, and the beginning 

2 of Phase Two was conducting preliminary 

3 interviews, which we did with some 

4 manufacturers last year. And after this 

5 meeting in the next stage, we will be 

6 conducting further -- more interviews with 

7 manufacturers. And this round is different 

8 from the last one, in that we're seeking 

9 detailed financial data, information, specific 

10 engineering data. We do this by conducting 

11 on-site interviews, and we sign a non12 disclosure agreement with whatever 

13 manufacturers we visit, so that when we do --

14 to use the data, we would have to aggregate 

15 that from many manufacturers, so that no one 

16 manufacturer's data is disclosed in the 

17 analysis. And we would like to set up those 

18 interviews very soon, so if you are a 

19 manufacturer and would like us to conduct an 

20 on-site interview to talk about the impacts of 

21 this rule, please approach us at the end or by 

22 email. 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 311

1 And, finally, I'm going to just 

2 briefly run through each of the analyses we'll 

3 be conducting for the NOPR phase. And, 

4 actually, I'm just going to let you read them 

5 up here. They're described in brief detail in 

6 the TSD. And part of the new -- besides the 

7 new analyses, we'll also be revising our 

8 previous analyses. And we will address any 

9 comments received from the pre-analysis stage, 

10 refine our inputs, refine our assumptions, so 

11 your inputs are very important to us. 

12 MR. BROOKMAN: So, let's just 

13 pause. That was really quite quick, and quite 

14 efficient. That was well done. I think as I 

15 cast my eyes around the room, I think 80 

16 percent of you, at least, are familiar with 

17 this content. Anybody that's not familiar 

18 with it, that would like to ask questions, 

19 because Rebecca has done a very nice job of 

20 summarizing. Just want to make sure. Yes, 

21 Harmon. 

22 MR. LEWIS: Just one thing. On 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 312

1 the Manufacturer Impact Analysis we were 

2 talking about during the break with Eric, some 

3 of those numbers that you're distributing, the 

4 R&D costs over are, again, off the 8 to 10 

5 times factor, so you need to get a better 

6 sample size of what all these 40 manufacturers 

7 actually produce each year. And I think 

8 you're way at the high side. 

9 MS. LEGETT: Thank you. That's 

10 very helpful. That's a good example of 

11 something that we can ask. That's a good 

12 example of something that manufacturers might 

13 not want to reveal publicly in comments, but 

14 we would cover during these confidential 

15 interviews and then aggregate the data to get 

16 a better picture. So, thank you. 

17 MR. BROOKMAN: Okay. So, the 

18 invitation, again, is to contact the 

19 Department to schedule these interviews, and 

20 get this underway. 

21 MS. LEGETT: Yes. 

22 MR. BROOKMAN: Okay. 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 313

1 DR. AMRANE: When are you planning 

2 to have those interviews, again? 

3 MS. LEGETT: Soon. 

4 MR. BROOKMAN: Karim, do you have 

5 a -- no. 

6 DR. AMRANE: Just curious. I 

7 mean, we're talking the next month, or the 

8 next two months? 

9 (Off mic comment.) 

10 DR. AMRANE: Summer. Okay. 

11 MR. BROOKMAN: Thank you, Charles. 

12 Okay. 

13 MS. LEGETT: All right. Now, I'm 

14 going to get into a discussion of -- I'd like 

15 to start off a discussion, and it'll take 

16 however long it takes, about some issues that 

17 were raised at the NOPR. Questions we asked, 

18 feedback we received, DOE is reconsidering 

19 some of these test procedure issues based on 

20 stakeholder comments that were received at the 

21 NOPR. So, we are considering some new 

22 approaches, and we'd like to get some 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 314

1 feedback. And there are four major issues 

2 here, definition of manufacturer, testing and 

3 compliance responsibility, a basic model 

4 issue, and some modifications to the test 

5 procedure. And we've already covered, I 

6 think, the first two in some of the opening 

7 statements. So, we do realize that this is a 

8 major issue that people have a lot of comments 

9 on, a lot of thoughts, so the Department is 

10 really trying to reach some consensus, some 

11 way forward through all this controversy, so 

12 your comments are greatly appreciated. 

13 So, first the definition of 

14 manufacturer. And people have disagreed on 

15 this. First, EPCA provides that this term 

16 "manufacture" means to manufacture, produce, 

17 assemble, or import. And you see the citation 

18 in the U.S. Code right here. At the NOPR 

19 public meeting, interested parties requested 

20 clarification of the definition of 

21 responsibilities associated with manufacturer. 

22 So, DOE is considering a way forward through 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 315

1 this, applying the term assemble within the 

2 definition of manufacture, to cover those 

3 entities that design and/or select components 

4 for a walk-in, envelope, or refrigeration 

5 system. 

6 So, what are some implications of 

7 this testing and compliance responsibility? 

8 In test procedure NOPR, DOE assumed that the 

9 manufacturer should be responsible for testing 

10 equipment and complying with the standard. 

11 There are a couple of problems with this 

12 assumption, not least of which was that there 

13 was a lot of contention as to who is the 

14 manufacturer. So, interested parties 

15 submitted comments on the NOPR indicating a 

16 strong preference for allowing component 

17 manufacturers to test their own products, and 

18 also noting that requiring a component 

19 manufacturer to test another component 

20 manufacturer's products would be burdensome. 

21 And I think Harmon raised this point earlier 

22 today. 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 316

1 So, in response to these comments, 

2 DOE is considering that the assembler, and 

3 according to the concept of assembler that I 

4 mentioned in the previous slide, of the walk5 in shall be the manufacturer responsible for 

6 demonstrating compliance with a performance 

7 standard. And DOE is considering allowing 

8 this assembler either to conduct the tests in 

9 the test procedure, or to rely on test results 

10 provided by component suppliers. In all 

11 cases, the testing must have been done 

12 according to the DOE test procedure. So, we 

13 request comment on these two items. 

14 MR. BROOKMAN: Fred. 

15 MR. MINELLI: I believe that the 

16 component manufacturer should be responsible 

17 for testing that component, and that in the 

18 procedures there should be a test set up for 

19 each component, and a level of compliance for 

20 the insulated panels, it should be the C518 R21 value, for glass doors I'm sure there's a 

22 prescriptive standard in EISA for the glass 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 317

1 doors so that the door manufacturers could 

2 meet those requirements and label, as such. 

3 MS. LEGETT: I'd like to clarify 

4 that this -- the testing and compliance 

5 responsibility, here we're really getting at 

6 compliance with an overall energy conservation 

7 standard. 

8 MR. MINELLI: Then, again, as I 

9 stated earlier, the compliance of the overall 

10 box, the assembly of the panels and 

11 refrigerations, and lighting, and glass doors, 

12 and components that we, typically, have 

13 absolutely nothing to do with - 

14 MR. BROOKMAN: You'd like to be 

15 responsible for your part. 

16 MR. MINELLI: Exactly. 

17 MR. BROOKMAN: Did you want in 

18 here, Mike? 

19 MR. STRAUB: Yes, I'd just agree 

20 with that 100 percent, that as the panel 

21 manufacturer to be responsible for the panels, 

22 that's what we control, that's what we build. 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 318

1 So, any more responsibility for the different 

2 components would be very burdensome. 

3 MR. BROOKMAN: Even if the 

4 assembly is done by others, you supply the 

5 parts, do you stand behind the parts of yours 

6 that you create? 

7 MR. MINELLI: If I supply glass 

8 doors to go in my panelized structure, then 

9 the glass door manufacturer needs to verify 

10 that that component meets the requirements. I 

11 have no design input, or even product 

12 knowledge of the doors. What I know is how an 

13 opening I need to leave it the box. 

14 MR. BROOKMAN: Jim. 

15 MR. PERRY: Jim Perry with Crown 

16 Tonka. Although I agree with what Fred's 

17 saying, I don't think that's what this is 

18 saying. I think what this is saying is the 

19 person that finally assembles it will be 

20 responsible for complying with the performance 

21 standards, or demonstrating that you comply 

22 with the performance standard. Correct? 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 319

1 MS. LEGETT: Yes. 

2 MR. BROOKMAN: Yes, thank you. 

3 MR. PERRY: They don't have to, 

4 necessarily, conduct tests, if the component 

5 suppliers give them good enough information to 

6 suggest that all the components comply. 

7 MR. BROOKMAN: Let's confirm that, 

8 as well. 

9 MR. LLENZA: Let me speak to that. 

10 This is Charles Llenza, Department of Energy. 

11 Since we're still in the process of composing 

12 this, and putting our test procedure, not only 

13 putting our test procedure together, but we're 

14 at preliminary stages for the standard, I 

15 cannot say that the Department, at this time, 

16 would say yes or no. There might be a test 

17 that we might require for performance, not 

18 necessarily for the component, because the 

19 components could be regulated differently, so 

20 that we wouldn't -- and the component 

21 manufacturers would not be expected to be 

22 attesting to the performance requirements of 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 320

1 the system. So, at this point -- and we 

2 understand the burden of the testing process 

3 to the manufacturers, and to the installers, 

4 and the distributors, everybody in the 

5 industry, basically, so I don't think the 

6 Department is interested in making that burden 

7 unrealistic. 

8 There's going to be some costs 

9 with meeting the new standards, and I think I 

10 don't want to be blindsiding the industry with 

11 saying that there will be no cost. But, at 

12 this point, what I can say is that we are 

13 trying our best to minimize any kind of 

14 additional requirements in terms of imposing 

15 those on industry for compliance and 

16 certification. So, we're very conscious about 

17 it, because we understand the cost 

18 implications of this for the industry. 

19 MR. BROOKMAN: Charles, if you 

20 look at that last bullet on Slide 101, maybe 

21 you'd said all that you wish to say. Can you 

22 further interpret what that means? 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 321

1 MR. LLENZA: This is Charles 

2 Llenza, Department of Energy, again. This is, 

3 basically, in line with my comment, which is 

4 that if we have something that's out there 

5 already that we can utilize in terms of 

6 certification for the compliance of our Energy 

7 Conservation Standard, then we'll use that. 

8 But we also may require some additional 

9 testing in order to give us a certainty level 

10 that the Energy Conservation Standard is being 

11 met. 

12 MR. BROOKMAN: In this case, that 

13 burden would fall, at the first half of that 

14 sentence, on the assembler? 

15 MR. LLENZA: Correct. As defined, 

16 as we define it here. 

17 MR. BROOKMAN: Assembler, in this 

18 case, you've expanded the definition, 

19 assembler is included under the definition of 

20 manufacturer. 

21 MR. LLENZA: Correct. 

22 MR. BROOKMAN: Okay. I'm trying 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 322

1 to establish a baseline here. Claire, go 

2 ahead. 

3 MS. GAGNE: Claire Gagne. Two 

4 things, Jim, getting back to what you were 

5 asking. In light of what Charles has said, 

6 we're still interested in your opinion about 

7 the way DOE should go forward on this issue. 

8 We just haven't made a decision yet. 

9 Secondly, I'd also like for us to be careful 

10 about how we're using the term "assembler," or 

11 "assemble." In Slide 100, it's defined as to 

12 cover those entities that design and/or select 

13 components. So, let's just keep that in mind 

14 as we discuss the term "assembly, assembler, 

15 assemble." 

16 MR. BROOKMAN: Okay. Thank you. 

17 Any additional comments then? Jim. 

18 MR. PERRY: So, Claire, it 

19 wouldn't, necessarily, be the person that 

20 actually puts it together in the field. 

21 MS. GAGNE: Not necessarily. 

22 MR. PERRY: Which somehow along 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 323

1 the line we need to encompass that, because I 

2 think Fred pointed out, we can make panels 

3 that are very well made, are compliant with 

4 all of the EISA standards, and an installer do 

5 a poor job putting them together, and then 

6 we've lost all the gains. So, if we include 

7 those folks, then I would be in favor of this 

8 kind of a definition. 

9 MR. BROOKMAN: That's good to note 

10 for the record. That's good to have. Karim. 

11 DR. AMRANE: Karim Amrane, AHRI. 

12 I guess I have a question of DOE. How is DOE 

13 planning to verify, to make sure that the box 

14 meets the requirement of the regulation in the 

15 field? 

16 MR. LLENZA: Again, we're still 

17 looking at all our options. We have an 

18 enforcement activity here at the Department, 

19 and we're talking to them closely in terms of 

20 trying to make something realistic, because it 

21 would make no sense if we just had a 

22 requirement out there, and had all these 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 324

1 certification requirements, and then not being 

2 able to enforce it, it would make no sense, so 

3 what we're trying to do right now at this 

4 stage, it's a little preliminary because we 

5 don't have the scheme completely developed. 

6 We have some legal requirements that we can 

7 utilize. We have some prescriptive 

8 requirements that we have out there that the 

9 component manufacturers could certify the 

10 components. I think we're still trying to 

11 formulate what would be the best way at the 

12 least economic impact to the industry for 

13 having some kind of certification scheme out 

14 there that would satisfy all parties, and that 

15 would spread out the responsibility to each 

16 element of the industry that's responsible for 

17 their particular areas. 

18 MR. BROOKMAN: So that if each 

19 aspect of the industry, just float a scenario, 

20 each person -- company that made something, if 

21 that assembler, the designer designed those 

22 pieces that came together in a way so that all 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 325

1 of the elements in it would meet a performance 

2 spec, that, conceivably, that would do it? 

3 MR. LLENZA: That could, 

4 potentially, be one of the scenarios. 

5 MR. BROOKMAN: Okay. One of the 

6 scenarios. 

7 MR. LLENZA: Yes. 

8 MR. BROOKMAN: Okay. 

9 MR. LLENZA: So, we don't want to 

10 limit ourselves at this point in time, because 

11 we've still got another two years to go here. 

12 So, what we're trying to do is assemble all 

13 the components necessary for us to be able to 

14 not only certify the equipment, but also then 

15 to certify that it's meeting some kind of 

16 Energy Conservation Standard. Because, if 

17 not, all this analysis, and all these 

18 calculations mean nothing, if we're not having 

19 any way of verifying that it's been assembled 

20 correctly, or put together correctly, or even 

21 designed correctly in the field. 

22 MR. BROOKMAN: Right. Then to 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 326

1 Charlie. Go ahead, Charlie. Stand up. Fred 

2 is first. 

3 MR. MINELLI: I just wanted to 

4 add, since we're talking about manufacturer, 

5 or assembler, or the person that picks the 

6 item, so it could be the building architect, 

7 or engineer of record, or the owner, so that 

8 it could be any one that decided how that unit 

9 goes together. It makes more sense, since 

10 they're picking the parts. And if each part 

11 is then certified, then it's much easier to 

12 certify the finished unit. 

13 MR. LLENZA: The other fact --

14 this is Charles Llenza, Department of Energy, 

15 also. Part of the situation is with the prior 

16 experience that the Department has in 

17 determining who's at fault is, we always find 

18 that there's more than just one party involved 

19 in a piece of equipment. And in this case, 

20 since the equipment is not an actual 

21 production line piece of equipment being made, 

22 it's highly customized, and sometimes it's 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 327

1 customized in parts, and assembled on site. 

2 So, you have a little bit of an iteration of 

3 what we normally would be in an enforcement 

4 scheme here at the Department of Energy, so 

5 what we, as the Department, would like to have 

6 is maximum flexibility to do our enforcement 

7 activities to make sure that the standards are 

8 being met. 

9 Now, part of the sensitivity to do 

10 this is in such a way so that everybody can 

11 continue operating with the minimum amount of 

12 cost involved to meet those requirements. 

13 And, I guess, that's part of art form of 

14 putting one of these standards out. So, 

15 that's why we're trying to work closely with 

16 the industry here. So, again, your comments 

17 would be greatly appreciated on all of this. 

18 We're listening. 

19 MR. BROOKMAN: Charlie. 

20 MR. STEPHENS: Charlie Stephens. 

21 I'd like to take us back to some fundamentals, 

22 just based on my own long history with these 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 328

1 sorts of things. I think it may have been 

2 Fred who said earlier in the day, very early 

3 in the day, that what we're dealing with here 

4 really is a building. And it really is a 

5 building more than anything else. It 

6 resembles a small building with windows in 

7 many cases, with a refrigeration system, just 

8 like a house with an air conditioning system, 

9 in a way. And the assembler in the case of a 

10 house is a builder. And that's normally 

11 enforced in the Building Code. And the 

12 Building Code is specified not by BTU or 

13 kilowatt hours per square foot. It's specified 

14 by window U-values at a certain maximum, R15 values in the walls at a certain minimum, 

16 component, by component, by component, and the 

17 assembler, the builder puts it together. 

18 But I can tell you from the 

19 perspective of my colleagues out where we are 

20 who've attempted to characterize the actual 

21 kilowatt hours per square foot of the final 

22 assembled building, failed miserably to 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 329

1 connect the model to building with all of its 

2 component specifications with the actual 

3 energy use of the thing, in part because they 

4 could not account for all the variations in 

5 use. 

6 And I'm sitting here looking at --

7 I mean, I'm already on the record as not 

8 quite believing the infiltration part of the 

9 analysis, and the amount of energy that goes 

10 into that, but still, it's a fairly large 

11 component there, and stopping that requires 

12 the installation, and the maintenance in good 

13 order of whatever measures are there to stop 

14 air from infiltrating into the structure. It 

15 also requires that the thing be installed 

16 rather well. And I think it's obvious to me, 

17 based on my own field experience, that finding 

18 somebody who's going to enforce something that 

19 looks like a BTU per square foot, or kilowatts 

20 hours per day, or something in the field is 

21 not going to happen. I don't care how hard 

22 you work at it. It ain't happening now with 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 330

1 houses, and we've been working at this for 30 

2 years. And it's got a long history, so I 

3 think, ultimately, I'm not sure that 

4 performance in this case shouldn't be brought 

5 down to the level of component performance, 

6 which a U-value is, which an R-value is. And 

7 maybe it looks a little bit like a house, and 

8 it's regulated a little bit by the house, but 

9 this thing is not an appliance, so I'm a 

10 little concerned here that the test procedure 

11 falls out based, to some extent, on what's the 

12 metrics of the standard you're trying to 

13 impose. So, I kind of like C518 as a test 

14 method, for instance, because it's fairly 

15 simple and straightforward to perform, and you 

16 don't have to do it over and over again, and 

17 it's scalable. And the math and physics is 

18 pretty well established. 

19 I like a lot of the -- AHRI has 

20 done a fine job with refrigeration testing, 

21 and test procedures, and I think those are 

22 pretty well in place, as long as the specs are 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 331

1 in place. NFRC has got some great window 

2 testing regimes that work right now, and have 

3 been working very well for windows and doors, 

4 patio doors, French doors, all kinds of doors 

5 with glass. So, I think there's lot of 

6 components already in place that would make 

7 this a whole lot simpler for just about 

8 everybody if we kind of got back to 

9 fundamentals, and thought very carefully about 

10 what it is we're trying to do here, and what 

11 the practical considerations are of making it 

12 happen in the field. 

13 I'll expound on this in more 

14 detail when I send in my written comments, but 

15 I would urge serious consideration of how this 

16 is being done at fundamental levels. 

17 MR. LLENZA: The Department 

18 totally acknowledges your comments, and from 

19 the Department's perspective, the statute 

20 requires that we come up with an Energy 

21 Conservation Standard. And the trick for the 

22 Department would be to be able to find a happy 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 332

1 medium in between, that we're regulating, we 

2 understand that as we're getting more and more 

3 involved in this process, we're understanding 

4 that we're actually regulating a building of 

5 sorts for the larger units, and the difficulty 

6 lies here that we're not so concerned with the 

7 smaller units that you can assemble and ship 

8 out on wheels. We're more concerned with the 

9 units that you assemble on site, so part of 

10 our function here at the Department will be to 

11 try to find a realistic way of doing this 

12 within the industry's mode of operation, let's 

13 put it that way. So, we're conscious about 

14 that. I can't promise anything, but I could 

15 say that we're very sensitive to what the 

16 industry thinks about the cost implications 

17 here if we make a mistake. 

18 MR. BROOKMAN: So, let's hear from 

19 other industry folks now, if there are 

20 additional comments. I think we've covered 

21 this pretty good. Karim. 

22 DR. AMRANE: Karim Amrane, AHRI. 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 333

1 I think I agree with Charlie. I think we need 

2 to look at the walk-ins the way we're looking 

3 at homes today, and homes are regulated by 

4 some prescriptive type of requirements. And 

5 what can happen, maybe a happy medium here 

6 would be to have the option. You could have 

7 no prescriptive requirements coupled with a 

8 performance requirement. 

9 Today in the code, for example, in 

10 the International Energy Conservation Code, 

11 for example, you could meet the code by either 

12 following the prescriptive requirements, or by 

13 following the performance path, which, 

14 basically, give you more leeway on what kind 

15 of components you can pick, but at the end you 

16 have to show that you're building -- that 

17 you're designing it as good as a baseline 

18 building that's defined within the code. So, 

19 I think there is a lot to learn from what the 

20 codes have done in the past, and maybe they 

21 could apply very well in the case of walk-ins. 

22 MR. BROOKMAN: Jon. 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 334

1 MR. McHUGH: So, last month I 

2 taught a number of classes to building 

3 officials, and there's a group that's probably 

4 worth interviewing, which is CALBO. I mean, 

5 there's other states, but that's the 

6 California Building Officials Association. I 

7 can give DOE some phone numbers and contact 

8 information. 

9 The primary thing that I walked 

10 away from some of those training sessions is 

11 that building officials really do not like 

12 performance standards. And the reason is, is 

13 that you have a performance standard that you 

14 did some kind of computer simulation, you did 

15 tradeoffs between different things, and 

16 there's nothing that they can actually 

17 inspect. They can't actually inspect the wall 

18 R-value, because you might have traded it off 

19 with the air conditioning efficiency, and vice 

20 versa. And they're having a hard time just 

21 making sure the SHGC of the windows is right, 

22 much less trying to sort through a performance 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 335

1 metric. 

2 One of the nice things about 

3 appliance standards is that the inspector 

4 actually doesn't have to check that. 

5 Supposedly, DOE has already done that, and is 

6 actually regulating the marketplace so that 

7 efficient appliances are already in the 

8 market, that when you go to the store, you buy 

9 the various pieces. You know that it meets -- 

10 that it has this minimum level of efficiency. 

11 So, to some extent, a standard that says oh, 

12 we're going to pass this onto to the states, 

13 and pass it onto their building officials to 

14 check, actually might take some of the burden 

15 off the manufacturers to some extent, because 

16 they'll be allowed to trade off between 

17 certain things, and potentially have less 

18 efficient components than if they had a 

19 component standard. But it actually adds a 

20 bunch of cost to the states, and if you look 

21 at the history of building departments trying 

22 to enforce something as complex as 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 336

1 refrigeration, the quads that might be posted 

2 on the screen might seem large, but the 

3 realized savings might be substantially less. 

4 MR. BROOKMAN: Thank you. 

5 MS. LEGETT: I have a -- actually, 

6 go ahead. 

7 MR. BROOKMAN: Yes, Dan. 

8 MR. MANOLE: Dan Manole. Just to 

9 share a current experience, let's see how --

10 with something similar. We manufacture like 

11 houses with -- so, they are treated also like 

12 a building. And UL, for example, has a 

13 program today to certify the building as an 

14 appliance so they can test -- we have a file, 

15 we place a mark, a UL mark, and the building 

16 inspector eventually will -- not eventually, 

17 will accept that product. However, even UL, 

18 we discontinue that program at the end of this 

19 year. UL considers that this kind of product, 

20 a building, which is like a mobile house, 

21 mobile home, they will not be able to certify, 

22 so instead they will provide a certificate, so 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 337

1 they will have -- they are required to inspect 

2 every house. 

3 MR. BROOKMAN: What's causing them 

4 to withdraw that UL certification? 

5 MR. MANOLE: You need to contact 

6 UL to get it. It is not something 

7 confidential, it's just for the details. What 

8 they informed us is that the building 

9 inspectors are not feeling comfortable with 

10 having this kind of UL mark on the house, and 

11 that is a safe product. They would rather 

12 have a testing per unit. 

13 MS. LEGETT: Yes. We can move on 

14 in just a second. Just to get back to these 

15 two questions, and encourage people to respond 

16 to these questions. What we're looking at, 

17 ideally, would be that say you agree with all 

18 this, the assembler conducts the tests and 

19 labels their components. Then whoever is 

20 putting them together has all that label data, 

21 feeds it into the test procedure, and comes 

22 out with a number. If the number is good, it 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 338

1 complies. I mean, that's -- ideally, we're 

2 moving towards a test procedure that's made up 

3 of a series of component tests. And this is 

4 just hypothetical, considering a way to move 

5 forward given all these issues. 

6 MS. GAGNE: Claire Gagne, just 

7 quickly. Did you mean to say that the 

8 assembler conducts the tests? 

9 MS. LEGETT: Assembler, or --

10 either the -- the component manufacturer 

11 could conduct the component tests for their 

12 own components, which is - 

13 MR. BROOKMAN: So, that's one 

14 pathway. 

15 MS. LEGETT: Yes. It's a pathway 

16 that - 

17 MR. BROOKMAN: Yes. Jim. 

18 MR. PERRY: So, you would feed it 

19 into some kind of a computer simulation. Is 

20 that what you're trying to say? 

21 MS. LEGETT: Well, the test 

22 procedure would be a calculation methodology 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 339

1 that took all these inputs and gave a result 

2 of energy consumption. 

3 MR. PERRY: And it's going to give 

4 you some kilowatt hours per day, or year, 

5 something like that? 

6 MS. LEGETT: Potentially, yes. 

7 MR. PERRY: You're not going to go 

8 back out and look, and say well, gee, you're 

9 getting -- it said 25, but you're getting 27, 

10 because we assume they open the door, whatever 

11 it was, 60 times a day, but in reality this 

12 particular walk-in is being opened 100 times a 

13 day. 

14 MS. LEGETT: Yes. You would only 

15 judge the energy conservation as it was tested 

16 by the test procedure. 

17 MR. PERRY: At the onset. 

18 MR. LLENZA: Charles Llenza, 

19 Department of Energy. Just for clarification, 

20 usually, we come in and do one test for the 

21 entire lifetime of the equipment, and we walk 

22 away. Once we certify that it's met the 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 340

1 requirements, we don't go back and retest. 

2 So, part of the thing is -- and the issue of 

3 use, also, as far as I know, most of our test 

4 procedures, and standards are not based, 

5 necessarily, on the use at this time. It may 

6 change in the future, but it's not heavily 

7 weighted that way. So, there's an average use 

8 that the industry has. We use those numbers, 

9 but you could have, theoretically, an operator 

10 that has a walk-in, and he doesn't care in 

11 using the hinged doors, so he leaves them 

12 open. He doesn't care how much he spends on 

13 electricity. We can't really monitor that, so 

14 he just has to pay the bill. 

15 MR. BROOKMAN: Whoever puts it 

16 together, though, has got to do it right. 

17 MS. LEGETT: So, in a sense that -

18 - I don't want to spend too much more time on 

19 this, but in -- if you can either comment in 

20 written comments, speak to these questions, or 

21 if you disagree with the approach, then 

22 suggest another approach, that would be 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 341

1 helpful to the Department. 

2 MR. BROOKMAN: Yes, Joanna. 

3 MS. MAUER: Joanna Mauer. I'm 

4 just trying to understand. It sounds like 

5 assemblers would comply by saying, basically, 

6 they know the performance of the panels they 

7 have, and the doors, and refrigeration 

8 equipment, and so on, and they can calculate 

9 some overall performance based on that. I'm 

10 trying to understand kind of what the real 

11 difference is between that and just having 

12 component performance standards, and DOE would 

13 conduct analysis to determine with those 

14 separate component performance standards kind 

15 of what the overall performance would be. 

16 MR. LLENZA: This is Charles 

17 Llenza, Department of Energy. It's, actually, 

18 the happy medium. We have to develop an 

19 Energy Conservation Standard so that the 

20 formula, the computer program helps us by 

21 setting some standard as the results. That 

22 may help us get our Energy Conservation 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 342

1 Standard. At the same time, going back to 

2 industry, and having industry set component 

3 standards, maybe that's the way it's going to 

4 end up. But, at this point, it's not really 

5 proper for me to say we're going to go one way 

6 or another, because we're not at that 

7 crossroad yet. And we've had some 

8 difficulties understanding the industry. The 

9 information and numbers are not that easy to 

10 get, and I think the dialogue here now is a 

11 good place where we're getting the feedback 

12 that we need in order to understand better 

13 what we're doing. 

14 So, what we've done with these 

15 slides is, we've gone -- we're at a level at 

16 the test procedures that we've heard what the 

17 industry said, we're coming back with some 

18 questions that are very pointed, because based 

19 on how we resolve this is how the test 

20 procedure is going to end up. So, it's 

21 critical that we get your feedback. 

22 MR. BROOKMAN: Yes, and we're 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 343

1 going to move on here shortly. Dan first, and 

2 then to Charlie. Go ahead. 

3 MR. MANOLE: Dan Manole. I believe 

4 this program with a check sheet will be good, 

5 and if we have it, that all can be applied 

6 ahead of time right at the design stage, so 

7 the installer, what he'll have to do is to 

8 make sure that he has a list of this is what 

9 it was in design, these other components, so 

10 it's not that he will have to test anything. 

11 So, we're not even going to start building 

12 unless we have the right components, and we 

13 are in compliance with the regulation. 

14 MR. BROOKMAN: Yes. Jim, go 

15 ahead. 

16 MR. PERRY: And then to follow-up 

17 on Dan's comments, it tends to be self18 regulating. 

19 MR. BROOKMAN: Yes. 

20 MR. PERRY: Because if the 

21 installer leaves a gaping hole in one of the 

22 seams, then it creates issues, and make us 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 344

1 come back and fix it. 

2 MR. BROOKMAN: Charlie. 

3 MR. STEPHENS: Charlie Stephens. 

4 I just wanted to add that one of our big 

5 concerns is that the order of magnitude of the 

6 assumptions that you would place in your 

7 calculation having to do with door openings, 

8 and infiltration rates, and just the physical 

9 location of the thing, whether it's in Alabama 

10 or Seattle, are going to overwhelm most of the 

11 incremental energy savings we're talking about 

12 here with regard to measures on the shell, 

13 based on the fact that we already have 

14 prescriptive standards that are in place. We 

15 are moving from that point forward. 

16 And I look at the order of 

17 magnitude here of how these things are used, 

18 and the standard deviation around the number 

19 you're going to get in whatever calculation 

20 method you come up with is going to be huge. 

21 So, the actual energy use -- I mean, one of 

22 the things that's been there in the standards 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 345

1 for a long time is that we try to at least 

2 make the test procedure, and the number you 

3 get out of this thing come fairly close to 

4 estimating what the actual energy use of this 

5 thing might be in the field. Refrigerators, 

6 historically, have come pretty close, a lot of 

7 the air conditioning systems. There's some 

8 assumptions there, but they come out somewhat 

9 close, the models are somewhat predictive. 

10 But in this case, you've got some rather large 

11 standard deviations here just based on the 

12 nature of the beast, and how they're used, and 

13 the incredible variety that you see out there 

14 in the field. So, it concerns us that even if 

15 you come up with this nice calculational 

16 method based on prescription, the standard 

17 deviation is going to be huge. 

18 MR. LLENZA: This is Charles 

19 Llenza, Department of Energy. The most 

20 important thing at this phase for the test 

21 procedure is that we make sure that we have 

22 tests for everything that we're going to go 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 346

1 test for, because if we can't test it, we 

2 can't give you credit, or if we can't measure 

3 it, we can't allocate it to the standard. 

4 Since the standard still has another two years 

5 to go, part of our job will be to maybe even 

6 go out there and do some field tests. I mean, 

7 if that's what it's going to take for us to 

8 get to some kind of metric, the Department is 

9 not tied not to go out there and do the job. 

10 So, we are going to go conduct manufacturer 

11 interviews, and interviews with the industry, 

12 so we're going to be out there asking for more 

13 input, and we will have another general 

14 meeting next year. But, at this point, this 

15 is not a static process, and I just want to 

16 make sure that people don't get alarmed. 

17 We're tackling the issues one-on18 one here. These are the ones that we -- the 

19 most critical ones we see for the test 

20 procedure, which we're trying to complete, and 

21 we're behind schedule, by the way, but once we 

22 have the metrics in the test procedure, then 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 347

1 the standard would be our major focus. And, 

2 again, our commitment is here to work with the 

3 industry to help get the best standard 

4 possible due to the fact that this is just not 

5 an appliance. 

6 MR. BROOKMAN: So, this exchange, 

7 I think, has been very constructive, very 

8 useful, and a lot of clarity coming from this. 

9 I want to make sure we address the other 

10 issues that Rebecca has queued in her slides. 

11 Mike, do you have a comment before we move 

12 on? 

13 MR. PERRODIN: More of a question. 

14 Has there been any thought on where the 

15 burden would fall to create a software 

16 modeling program to calculate the energy 

17 usage? 

18 MS. LEGETT: At the moment, it's 

19 the test procedure, the proposed test 

20 procedure is the calculation methodology. 

21 MR. BROOKMAN: So, that would be 

22 widely available. 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 348

1 MS. LEGETT: Well, it's -- I mean, 

2 the proposed test procedure has been 

3 published. And, eventually, we're going to 

4 have a final test procedure at some point. 

5 MR. BROOKMAN: Joanna. 

6 MS. MAUER: Joanna Mauer, just a 

7 quick question. Does DOE have any idea how 

8 many people would fall into this category of 

9 assemblers, some kind of rough number? 

10 MR. BROOKMAN: It's a lot of 

11 potential different people. Right? Yes. 

12 MS. MAUER: It just seems like it 

13 would just make - 

14 MR. BROOKMAN: Are there other 

15 issues to be addressed? Yes. 

16 MS. LEGETT: Yes, there's three 

17 more. 

18 MR. BROOKMAN: Let's deal with 

19 these other three issues. 

20 MS. LEGETT: Okay. 

21 MR. BROOKMAN: Then we could 

22 double back at the end, as required. Let's 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 349

1 make sure we get coverage on this. 

2 MR. LLENZA: Charles Llenza, also. 

3 My suggestion is that these are great 

4 suggestions and questions and to send your 

5 questions and suggestions, because these are 

6 the things that we need to understand that 

7 people have questions on, so that we can 

8 develop answers. 

9 MS. LEGETT: All right. Let me 

10 move on. There's some implications of this 

11 way forward that DOE may be considering for 

12 other aspects of the test procedure. One of 

13 these is on the way DOE is defining basic 

14 model envelope. Here you see the definition 

15 that was proposed in the NOPR, and we received 

16 comments that this was too vague. So, basic 

17 model means all units of a given type of walk18 in equipment, et cetera. Envelopes which do 

19 not have any differing construction methods, 

20 materials, components, or other 

21 characteristics that significantly affect the 

22 energy consumption characteristics. And there 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 350

1 was not consensus on what significantly affect 

2 would mean, so DOE is considering changing the 

3 definition in order to be consistent with some 

4 other changes to the test procedure. 

5 The original definition, the goal 

6 was to provide flexibility for manufacturers, 

7 but with the new approach that DOE is 

8 considering, that flexibility is actually 

9 provided in other aspects of the test 

10 procedure. And the next slide details those, 

11 so the revised definition means that basic 

12 model means all envelopes which do not have 

13 any differing features that affect normalized 

14 energy consumption. And the proposed test 

15 procedure said normalized energy consumption 

16 was energy consumption per square foot of 

17 surface area, but I'd rather not get into that 

18 right now, because - 

19 MR. BROOKMAN: Wait, wait. 

20 MS. LEGETT: Sorry. 

21 MR. BROOKMAN: Let's just give 

22 them a chance to read the revised definition, 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 351

1 bottom of page 103, just give a chance for 

2 that to sink in. 

3 MS. LEGETT: All right. 

4 MR. BROOKMAN: Are you able to 

5 simply interpret how any differing features, 

6 how that's a change from the previous proposed 

7 definition? 

8 MS. LEGETT: Are you asking me? 

9 MR. BROOKMAN: Yes. 

10 MS. LEGETT: So, in the NOPR 

11 presentation, we showed two envelopes, and 

12 they look the same, except one was larger. 

13 And we said they would be the same basic 

14 model, because you could apply certain scaling 

15 factors. 

16 What we're saying is that for now 

17 what we're considering is, for those to be the 

18 same basic model, they would have to have the 

19 same normalized energy consumption, as tested, 

20 which the example in the NOPR, they may or may 

21 not have. Does that makes sense? 

22 MR. BROOKMAN: Okay. So, now 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 352

1 continue with your slides. 

2 MS. LEGETT: Okay. The 

3 justification for changing the definition is 

4 to provide a way to distinguish envelopes that 

5 vary in normalized energy consumption from 

6 those that differ only cosmetically. For 

7 instance, they're a different color. Those 

8 shouldn't be considered different basic models 

9 because they would have the same tested 

10 normalized energy consumption. 

11 And, as I said before, previously, 

12 the intent of the definition was to reduce 

13 manufacturer testing burden, but the burden14 reducing measures proposed elsewhere in the 

15 test procedure would, DOE believes, accomplish 

16 the same goal. And one of those is adding 

17 language to the test procedure that would 

18 allow manufacturers to calculate energy 

19 consumption by scaling results of physical 

20 testing. And the distinction here is that 

21 this actually takes place within the test 

22 procedure. It's not, necessarily, part of the 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 353

1 basic model definition. The other, as we just 

2 discussed a couple of slides ago, was allowing 

3 manufacturers to rely on supplier's test data. 

4 There may be another burden associated 

5 with the definition of basic model. That's a 

6 compliance and reporting burden, but that is, 

7 actually, established – compliance, 

8 certification, and enforcement regulations are 

9 actually established in another rulemaking in 

10 which DOE will consider burden-reducing 

11 measures. 

12 So, I don't know if people have 

13 comment that's different from comment that was 

14 made earlier, but to the extent that you do, 

15 please comment. 

16 MR. BROOKMAN: Jon. 

17 MR. McHUGH: This is Jon. Could 

18 you explain a little bit the future rulemaking 

19 that establishes compliance certification and 

20 enforcement, since that seems to be kind of 

21 the nub of what we've been talking about 

22 today? 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 354

1 MR. LLENZA: Yes. This is Charles 

2 Llenza, Department of Energy. Part of the 

3 regimen here is that we do test procedures, so 

4 there's a rulemaking for that. We do 

5 standards, there's a rulemaking for that. So, 

6 at some point, we have a compliance scheme. 

7 Based on the compliance scheme, is what you 

8 can execute for an enforcement scheme. It's a 

9 separate track, and so far, historically, the 

10 Department has put a separate document out, 

11 which provides the information on the 

12 enforcement of details for the different 

13 appliances. 

14 Up to today, we have put out the 

15 EPACT 2005 Compliance and Certification 

16 document. That has to be updated to EISA 

17 2007. This an EISA 2007 product, therefore, 

18 the scheme for that would be in the next 

19 document. And that's not expected to be 

20 published, I don't think any time soon. We're 

21 probably talking next year, late next year. 

22 MR. McHUGH: Is it possible to do 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 355

1 something concurrent so that the efficacy of 

2 the enforcement regime is something that flows 

3 into the structure of the standard, and the 

4 structure of the test method? 

5 MR. LLENZA: This is Charles 

6 Llenza, Department of Energy, again. The way 

7 this flows is the test procedure flows into 

8 the standard. The standard sets up the 

9 enforcement schemes for the compliance of 

10 certification rule. And then the enforcement 

11 activity, which is controlled out of our 

12 General Counsel's office, would then have the 

13 policies that set up the enforcement activity 

14 within the Department based on whatever 

15 policies the administration carries at this 

16 time. So, that's kind of the way it is, so 

17 we're on track for this. And I know this is a 

18 little bit difficult to understand, because 

19 most people -- this is the first time you guys 

20 are being regulated, but it sort of has a 

21 sequence that we're following. And we're not 

22 there yet, again, as I said. We're a year or 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 356

1 two out before--. But what we do in the 

2 Department is, as we go through the standards 

3 process, we will put in there whatever is 

4 necessary to start establishing the compliance 

5 and certification scheme, which then the 

6 compliance and certification rule will pick up 

7 to clarify it, and to help the implementation 

8 of the rule in terms of getting the compliance 

9 of certification documents. 

10 MR. BROOKMAN: Because it's a 

11 three-year, typically, window for the 

12 effective date. 

13 MR. LLENZA: Right. 

14 MR. BROOKMAN: Right. 

15 MR. LLENZA: And that's why you 

16 have a three-year window. It's not only 

17 because of implementing of the standard, but 

18 it's also so the Department can get all the 

19 different components that they set up in order 

20 for it to do the enforcement activity in the 

21 future. 

22 MR. BROOKMAN: Betsy. 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 357

1 MS. KOHL: This is Betsy Kohl. I 

2 don't want to -- just to clarify. We don't 

3 have to do it in that order, test procedure, 

4 standard, enforcement, but we have the option 

5 to combine things if we want to, but we have a 

6 number of different ways we could do it. 

7 MR. BROOKMAN: Okay. Thank you. 

8 I would like to get comment on this Slide 104. 

9 And I'd like to make sure you couple it with 

10 Slide 103, which provides the revised 

11 definition, and see if anybody's got anything 

12 else to say about that before we move on. 

13 Nothing additional? 

14 MS. LEGETT: And feel free to 

15 submit your comments in writing, if you have 

16 any. 

17 MR. BROOKMAN: Okay. 

18 MS. LEGETT: I'm going to move on, 

19 the last two slides. And these are specific 

20 modifications to the envelope test procedure 

21 that address stakeholder comments on the NOPR. 

22 And, also, kind of flow out of the idea that 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 358

1 component manufacturers may be testing their 

2 own components. The idea is to incorporate 

3 more individual component tests into the test 

4 procedure. 

5 The first issue is heat conduction 

6 through structural members of panels. In the 

7 NOPR, DOE proposed to determine the heat 

8 conduction only by measuring R-value of the 

9 foam. But interested parties during the NOPR 

10 stated that DOE must also account for heat 

11 conduction through structural members of 

12 panels. So, DOE is considering ASTM C1363-05, 

13 also known as the hot box method. And, first, 

14 manufacturers of the -- whoever is doing the 

15 testing of the panel would find the U-factor 

16 of the fully assembled panel using ASTM 1363, 

17 and then the U-factor of the fully assembled 

18 panel would be derated using the R-value of 

19 the foam as found by ASTM C1303, which was 

20 actually proposed. So, ASTM C1303 was the 

21 test procedure proposed in the NOPR for 

22 finding the R-value of the foam. So, I want 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 359

1 to reiterate that interested parties 

2 recommended 1363, this hot box method, as 

3 being particularly applicable to walk-in 

4 panels, but we'd like to hear your comments on 

5 that. 

6 MR. BROOKMAN: Yes, Fred. 

7 MR. MINELLI: Is there -- I'm 

8 familiar with 1363, but I don't remember if 

9 there is a certain size limitation or 

10 specification. What's the - 

11 MS. LEGETT: I'd actually like to 

12 defer to Eric on this question. 

13 MR. FITZ: So, based on the 

14 comments in the NOPR public meeting, DOE is 

15 considering setting some kind of size. It 

16 hasn't settled on anything specifically yet, 

17 but it's something that is being carefully 

18 considered based on comments from 

19 manufacturers. 

20 MR. MINELLI: It makes a huge 

21 difference in our business, just in the 

22 difference in the types of panels, and the 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 360

1 types of products we all manufacture. In a 

2 small box typical for restaurants, heavy 

3 structural members are not typical. But in 24 

4 by 70 by 20 foot tall boxes, you need 

5 structure to hold that together. In saying 

6 that, a 4 by 8 panel, or two 4 by 8s together 

7 run through this test, structural members in 

8 that size of a specimen would seriously affect 

9 R-value. But in a typical where that would be 

10 used in a 12 or 16 by 12 or 16 group of 

11 panels, it would be pretty insignificant. It 

12 needs to represent some reality. 

13 MR. FITZ: Do you have a 

14 recommendation, specifically, by different 

15 sizes of overall units that are shipped? 

16 MR. MINELLI: I don't know, 12 by 

17 16, 16 by 20. 

18 MR. BROOKMAN: And you can put 

19 this in your written comments. I thought you 

20 were also suggesting there was maybe some sort 

21 of a threshold, also. 

22 MR. FITZ: So, you said a 4 by 8, 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 361

1 a 12 by 16, and maybe something else, or even 

2 larger units? 

3 MR. MINELLI: I guess I would have 

4 to look at what's really typical in our 

5 industry, our part of this industry, and make 

6 a suggestion based on that. 

7 MR. FITZ: Okay. That would be 

8 very helpful. 

9 MR. BROOKMAN: Go ahead, Jim. 

10 MR. PERRY: Jim Perry, Crown Tonka 

11 Walk-Ins. Rebecca mentioned that she wanted 

12 to reiterate that this was brought up by an 

13 interested party. I think it was brought up 

14 by a single interested party, and not by the 

15 industry as a whole. 

16 I would suggest that the effect of 

17 the structural members, which I take to mean 

18 the rails of the panels, are insignificant 

19 relative to the overall R-factor of the box as 

20 a whole. My suggestion would be that we just 

21 don't guess on a threshold, or anything like 

22 that, but do some initial testing with this 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 362

1 ASTM 1363 test to see if there is any 

2 significance to the rails, to the overall R3 value of the panel. And then that would be a 

4 good way of deciding if it should be 

5 considered, or not considered. 

6 MR. BROOKMAN: Charlie. 

7 MR. STEPHENS: Charlie Stephens. 

8 That's not a bad suggestion, if people are 

9 wiling to go out and test. One of the ways you 

10 can guess at it is, and I'm not a 

11 manufacturer, so I can't tell you for your own 

12 panel systems, but if you take your typical 

13 structures, looks at what's called the framing 

14 factor, and find out what fraction of the 

15 overall surface area has framing through it, 

16 and what fraction doesn't, you can sort of 

17 guess. And if you can approximate that 

18 framing factor, regardless of the sample size 

19 that you use in the guarded hot box, as long 

20 as you're at about 8 by 8 minimum, you can 

21 probably come pretty close to making it 

22 negligible, if you can approximate the framing 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 363

1 factor. 

2 MR. MINELLI: You can calculate --

3 this is Fred Minelli. You can calculate that 

4 number. I mean, we do it all the time, and it 

5 typically equates to leaving the door open 10 

6 seconds longer in the day time. It's pretty 

7 insignificant, but what my concern is, is that 

8 it puts frame panel manufacturers at a 

9 disadvantage. 

10 MR. BROOKMAN: I would simply note 

11 - I would call attention to the nature of 

12 Eric's follow-on questions. He was looking 

13 for specifics, so in your written comments, if 

14 you can describe the sizes, describe the way 

15 it would be tested, describe where it becomes 

16 negligible, and back that up, then that's 

17 going to be very helpful to the Department. 

18 MR. FITZ: And to respond to your 

19 question, if manufacturers are willing to 

20 complete testing on their units, and to share 

21 that information with the Department, that 

22 would be useful, as well. 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 364

1 MR. BROOKMAN: I want to make sure 

2 we cover this adequately. Rebecca, do you 

3 think we have? One more, yes. Harmon, 

4 please. 

5 MR. LEWIS: The big issue at the 

6 March meeting was the long-term R-value using 

7 the ASTM C1303-08, is the -09A like the -08, 

8 the thin cut samples for the long-term, or is 

9 this something totally different? Because it 

10 was overwhelmingly, you know, 18 to the one 

11 guy that brought it up against doing that, 

12 because it wasn't representative of the long13 term aging. You've got your metal facing on 

14 the installation, and that's how it should be 

15 measured. So, I thought that was put to bed. 

16 I'm not sure what 1303-09A is. 

17 MS. LEGETT: The question -- so, 

18 ASTM C1303-09A is an update to 1303-08 that 

19 doesn't make any significant changes, so we 

20 are still talking about the same test 

21 procedure. 

22 MR. LEWIS: Everybody but Elliot 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 365

1 was against that method of measurement, 

2 because the panels had metal facings on them, 

3 and to take the foam, slice it thin, and then 

4 test it in short-term and say that's what the 

5 long-term value is makes no sense. I thought 

6 that was a consensus of opinion at that time. 

7 I don't know how it's bouncing back up as the 

8 test method. 

9 MR. FITZ: We agree there are lots 

10 of comments that suggested that it was --

11 didn't apply to walk-in panels. But we would 

12 still like manufacturers to submit data that 

13 supports that statement. 

14 MS. LEGETT: Also, the question at 

15 hand here is, we're really -- I mean, we 

16 understand your concerns about 1303, but we're 

17 really asking about the hot box method. I 

18 mean, say we use the hot box method by itself. 

19 I mean, are you okay with that method? 

20 MR. BROOKMAN: Thanks for that 

21 clarification. Is it Milen? 

22 MR. KIRILOV: Milen Kirilov, 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 366

1 Carpenter. I'd like to make two comments. 

2 First is concerning ASTM 1363, or the hot box, 

3 I would like that the Department run a study 

4 to determine a correlation to the current 

5 standard C518 with respect to structural 

6 members, and create a correlation between C518 

7 and the hot box. I'm not very familiar with 

8 the hot box test, and I don't know how much 

9 the cost will be compared to C518, but that's 

10 the standard that's currently used, and that 

11 should be considered in the future regulation. 

12 And what I'm trying to say is that there may 

13 be a more simple test to use instead of the 

14 hot box. I don't think we should be jumping 

15 on - 

16 MS. LEGETT: Can you suggest as to 

17 what that test would be? 

18 MR. KIRILOV: C518. 

19 MS. LEGETT: Okay. Do you have a 

20 recommend - 

21 MR. KIRILOV: The thermal 

22 conductivity of the structural members, such 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 367

1 as wood. That's known value, and the foam. 

2 So, can we use a more simple method to 

3 calculating the overall panel? 

4 MR. FITZ: So, are you suggesting 

5 using C518 to measure the heat conduction of 

6 every single component in a walk-in panel? 

7 MR. KIRILOV: Yes. And the 

8 Department can run a study as to how it 

9 compares to the hot box. And I'm sure the 

10 correlation will be there. 

11 MR. FITZ: Sure. Do you have a 

12 guess at how many unique components are in a 

13 single panel, on average? 

14 MR. KIRILOV: Well, they can 

15 calculate for each panel, the manufacturer. 

16 They can calculate the fraction of the 

17 structural members, if the Department decides 

18 to regulate that. 

19 MR. BROOKMAN: Jim is holding up 

20 his fingers. How many are you saying? 

21 MR. PERRY: Three, typically, 

22 foam, wood, and metal. 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 368

1 MR. KIRILOV: Sometimes plywood, I 

2 guess, if it's a floor. 

3 MR. BROOKMAN: Since we're on this 

4 point, I'm going to continue. Fred. 

5 MR. MINELLI: You wouldn't 

6 consider anything that didn't stretch from 

7 inside to outside, because it wouldn't be 

8 worthwhile. So, all we have is foam and rail, 

9 if a rail is used. There's nothing else 

10 there. 

11 MR. BROOKMAN: Okay. Kenny. 

12 Thanks. 

13 MR. OWEN: First comment, on the 

14 C1363-05, the hot box method, can you give us 

15 a quick summary, and tell us what that 

16 involves, just a couple of minutes, because 

17 I'm not that familiar with it. 

18 MR. FITZ: Sure. So, you, for 

19 example, if -- the Department will probably 

20 specify some kind of size, that's what we were 

21 just talking about, of a panel that actually 

22 needs to be tested. So, for just, 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 369

1 hypothetically, let's say it's a 4 by 8 foot 

2 panel. So, you take that 4 by 8 foot panel, 

3 you place it in a chamber that on one side it 

4 controls the temperature at say 75 degrees, 

5 and on the other side it holds a temperature, 

6 let's say 55 degrees, or 10 degrees, or minus 

7 10 degrees, and then it actually measures the 

8 heat flow through that entire composite panel 

9 based on that temperature difference. 

10 MR. OWEN: I think that is an 

11 excellent way of doing it. That is the way it 

12 should be done. And my second comment about 

13 1303-09, it's the same as we said before. A 

14 thin slice method is just not applicable to 

15 urethane foam panels that have metal faces on 

16 them, so we do not need to consider that at 

17 all. 

18 MR. BROOKMAN: Thank you. Yes, 

19 Fred. 

20 MR. MINELLI: I just want to add 

21 one more. We're talking about 1303 again. It 

22 specifically says spray foam with no barrier, 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 370

1 with no impermeable barrier. It does not 

2 apply to these panels, whatsoever. I don't 

3 know why we're still considering it. 

4 MR. BROOKMAN: Okay. Thanks for 

5 that clarity. What about this? Let's go to 

6 the last point. 

7 MS. LEGETT: Sure. There are also 

8 some new door tests that DOE is considering. 

9 In the NOPR, it proposed certain procedures 

10 for testing doors. For testing the U-factor 

11 of display doors, either using an NFRC rating, 

12 if such rating existed, or a Window 5.2 

13 methodology. And for a steady state 

14 infiltrate, and Window 5.2 is a particular 

15 computer program where you input certain 

16 parameters of the glass door, and it gives you 

17 some -- a U-factor. 

18 The other procedure for testing 

19 the steady state infiltration around doors, 

20 the proposal was to use the gas tracer method 

21 for each individual door. And given the 

22 consideration of a few slides ago, where DOE 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 371

1 is considering allowing component 

2 manufacturers, for example, door 

3 manufacturers, to test their products and 

4 submit that test data to the assembler, DOE is 

5 considering these other tests. For the U6 factor of doors, a particular NFRC procedure. 

7 NFRC is the National Fenestration Rating 

8 Council. And for steady state infiltration 

9 around doors, another NFRC test procedure that 

10 references an ASTM standard, E283-04, which 

11 determines rate of air leakage through 

12 windows, walls, and doors under specified 

13 pressure differences. 

14 And we request comment on these 

15 test procedures, particularly on whether you 

16 think that they're good test procedures, 

17 whether there's any undue burden associated 

18 with them, and whether -- I don't know if 

19 there are any door manufacturers here, but 

20 whether door manufacturers might be willing to 

21 complete these tests themselves, and submit 

22 that test data. 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 372

1 MR. FITZ: Can I just add one more 

2 thing? ASTM 283 was a recommended test 

3 procedure suggested by manufacturers, and 

4 other stakeholders during the NOPR public 

5 meeting. 

6 MR. BROOKMAN: Thank you. I recall 

7 the discussion surrounding doors. Yes. So, 

8 comments on this thing that the Department is 

9 considering? Fred, go ahead. 

10 MR. MINELLI: Fred Minelli. I 

11 just wanted to verify that this only applies 

12 to glass reach-in doors. Right? Is that what 

13 we're talking about here? 

14 MS. LEGETT: Which part of it, or 

15 both parts? 

16 MR. MINELLI: The entire door 

17 test. 

18 MS. LEGETT: Right. These would 

19 be for both display, and non-display doors. 

20 MR. BROOKMAN: What about the 

21 infiltration around the door? 

22 MS. LEGETT: Right, both. 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 373

1 MR. MINELLI: You're talking about 

2 a walk-through - 

3 MS. LEGETT: Either one. 

4 MR. FITZ: Yes, a non-glass door. 

5 MR. MINELLI: That are 

6 specifically designed with wiper gaskets so 

7 that they'll allow pressurized air to move in 

8 and out, so what good is the test? 

9 MR. FITZ: I mean, glass doors are 

10 also designed to minimize infiltration. 

11 MR. MINELLI: Right, but they're 

12 not designed with wiper gaskets to allow 

13 pressurized air to move, so I'm just saying if 

14 the test is designed for glass doors with 

15 fixed gasket four sides, it is not designed 

16 for walk-through doors with wiper gaskets on 

17 the bottom, because there's nothing to stop 

18 the air flow, so what are you testing? 

19 MR. BROOKMAN: Go ahead, Charlie. 

20 MR. STEPHENS: Charlie Stephens. 

21 It'll actually test that all right. The 

22 pressure differences that are used in most 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 374

1 cases are not large enough to be moving that 

2 gasket around. But the fact is a wiper gasket 

3 like that does leak some air. It will just 

4 simply measure how much it leaks, and give you 

5 a rating for the door. 

6 MR. BROOKMAN: As closed. 

7 MR. STEPHENS: When it's closed. 

8 MR. BROOKMAN: Yes. 

9 MR. STEPHENS: Exactly. I mean, 

10 it won't be as good as, perhaps, a glass door 

11 in terms of air leakage that's sealed all the 

12 way around, but it at least tells you what its 

13 rating is, and what its normal rate of air 

14 leakage would be under those conditions. And 

15 you take the pressure differential, and you 

16 can calculate what it would be at any pressure 

17 differential that you might agree is the right 

18 pressure differential once you have the test 

19 data. So, it's a valid test, but it will 

20 definitely, you're right, give you a different 

21 rating than it would for, say, a glass door. 

22 MR. BROOKMAN: Jon. 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 375

1 MR. McHUGH: So, I'm supportive of 

2 these two methods, but, in addition, I'd like 

3 to see a labeling program, such as NFRC has, 

4 so that we start labeling the various 

5 components, the walls, the doors, the glass 

6 doors, et cetera. 

7 MR. BROOKMAN: Okay. Thanks for 

8 that. I want to take final comments on 

9 perhaps these last two slides, 105 and 106, 

10 see if anything else comes out. It seemed to 

11 me as though the discussion surrounding heat 

12 conduction through structural members, 105, 

13 sounds pretty complete to me. I want to make 

14 sure 106 is also complete. Yes. 

15 MR. LEWIS: One thing, Doug, that 

16 was brought out at the March meeting, the air 

17 infiltration under the sweep gasket of the 

18 walk-in doors infinitesimal compared to every 

19 time you open that door, so we'll spend a lot 

20 of money to find that out, or some amount of 

21 money. I'm not sure of the relevancy of it, 

22 as was stated back then. It didn't pass 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 376

1 Kenny's smell test in March, I don't think it 

2 does in May. 

3 MR. BROOKMAN: Okay. Thank you. 

4 Do you have any other questions you wish to 

5 raise? 

6 MS. LEGETT: That's it. 

7 MR. BROOKMAN: That's it. As we 

8 promised this morning first thing, now is an 

9 opportunity for anybody to make additional 

10 comments, particularly issues that have not 

11 yet been covered sufficiently, because we are 

12 moving towards closure of this meeting. Yes, 

13 Jim. 

14 MR. PERRY: Jim Perry, Crown 

15 Tonka. I think most of us manufacturers 

16 appreciate the opportunity to participate, and 

17 be heard, and get our thoughts and ideas 

18 incorporated in this. Not necessarily are we 

19 the best at checking the website periodically 

20 to make sure that we have knowledge of 

21 upcoming festivities. Is there any other way 

22 that we might be able to get on a short list 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 377

1 of notification, or something like that? 

2 MR. LLENZA: Charles Llenza, 

3 Department of Energy. We maintain a database, 

4 and part of what we do is that little business 

5 card thing that's going around, we make sure 

6 that those people, at a minimum, are on that 

7 database of stakeholders. So, if you feel 

8 that you may not be there or that we have the 

9 incorrect information, send me a quick email, 

10 and I'll make sure that that -- with your 

11 digits, your information for you to be 

12 contact, and I'll make sure that that gets on 

13 the database. 

14 MR. BROOKMAN: It's not automatic? 

15 MR. LLENZA: Right. The other 

16 thing to look for is the website, that's one 

17 place. The notification the Department does 

18 also, but also anything that comes out of the 

19 Federal Register, which is the formal 

20 notification process. And I know that's a 

21 little more complicated. 

22 MR. BROOKMAN: Charles, if they've 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 378

1 registered for this meeting, if their name is 

2 on that, will they receive automatic 

3 notification of upcoming meetings? 

4 MR. LLENZA: Well, the Department 

5 doesn't notify automatically. We do that as a 

6 courtesy. In my case, I think being proactive 

7 as opposed to passive is a better approach for 

8 this rule we're making, so I usually notify. 

9 MR. PERRY: We seem to get this 

10 verification of email address email. 

11 MR. LLENZA: Right. 

12 MR. PERRY: And then nothing. 

13 MR. LLENZA: For this particular 

14 meeting, since the notice went out with plenty 

15 of notice, I did not -- and I'm personally 

16 responsible. I did not send any courtesy 

17 notification out via email, so there was none. 

18 But what I got was a lot of questions from 

19 people, why didn't I get personally notified? 

20 And it's because we usually don't do that, 

21 and I have to take the mea culpa that I did 

22 not notify everybody thinking that everybody 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 379

1 had sufficient time to pick up the information 

2 from the Federal Register, or the website. 

3 But because we have substantial amount of 

4 things to do with this, I'll make sure that 

5 I'm constantly using our notification 

6 stakeholders lists with anything in particular 

7 that might come up, in order to inform the 

8 industry that we're working on things. 

9 MR. PERRY: We would appreciate 

10 that. And just one more follow-up question. 

11 Is there any more meetings anticipated the 

12 balance of the year? 

13 MR. LLENZA: At this moment in 

14 time, I can't really talk about anything that 

15 I can think of, other than we will -- we have 

16 talked about visiting ASHRAE, some test 

17 procedure issues for CRE, but we also we're 

18 looking into potentially maybe, since some of 

19 the same stakeholders that are at this meeting 

20 were at the meeting yesterday, maybe that 

21 would be a good opportunity for us to talk 

22 some technical issues at ASHRAE, and that's 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 380

1 something I need to explore with the team 

2 since it came up in the last couple of days. 

3 That would be at the end of June, that's my 

4 understanding. Right? 

5 And in terms of the manufacturer 

6 interviews, or any other kind of interviews 

7 that the team might have on a technical level, 

8 that would probably be done on a one-on-one 

9 basis. 

10 The other thing that I'm exploring 

11 based on some recommendations that I heard 

12 across the table here would be to have some 

13 kind of technical meeting that would not be 

14 part of the -- necessarily, part of the 

15 regulatory part of this, the standards 

16 process, but a technical meeting to discuss 

17 maybe some of the technical issues that we've 

18 had back and forth. And one of the things 

19 could be the insulation issues that we have. 

20 And I'm certainly open to suggestions, and I 

21 have to check with GC, because I don't want to 

22 get in trouble here. We have issues with 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 381

1 disclosure. But we are not -- we would also 

2 be amenable to -- if we had to put a 

3 notification out into the Federal Register to 

4 have this meeting, we would do that to comply 

5 with our legal requirements. 

6 MR. BROOKMAN: An opportunity for 

7 closing remarks, issues that need to be raised 

8 that haven't been raised so far. Jon. 

9 MR. McHUGH: So, this is somewhat 

10 new, but as I mentioned before, California is 

11 looking at holding a Title 20 proceeding on 

12 walk-ins, as is allowed by EISA, and I'd like 

13 to invite any and all people who are here to 

14 participate in those proceedings. And related 

15 to that, the likely outcome is additional 

16 prescriptive requirements in the California 

17 standard. I'd like to hear DOE's opinion, if 

18 the sort of anti-backsliding sort of 

19 provisions that were held up by the Supreme 

20 Court would apply to a California standard for 

21 walk-ins. 

22 MR. KIDO: I'm not going to 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 382

1 comment on that right now. 

2 MR. BROOKMAN: Thank you. Michael 

3 Kido. Thank you. Final comments? So, for my 

4 part, I thank all of you. This was very, very 

5 constructive. I really appreciate the level 

6 of disclosure, the level of candor, and back 

7 to Charles Llenza for closing remarks. 

8 MR. LLENZA: Again, thank you for 

9 all attending this meeting today. I think 

10 it's been very informative to the Department. 

11 We have a lot to do still, but I think, at 

12 this point, I think -- I hope that the 

13 stakeholders are a little bit more comfortable 

14 with us and this process. And, again, we are 

15 working pretty hard here to try to make sure 

16 we get this right. We still have a long way 

17 to go, and we appreciate your patience up to 

18 this point. And we just request a little bit 

19 more patience here as we go through in the 

20 next couple of months trying to get all the 

21 different comments in, and all the issues 

22 resolved. So, thank you for attending. 

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 383

1 Once again, I just want to remind 

2 you, the formal comment period ends on the 

 th

3 28 . I don't want to commit to, necessarily, 

4 saying send your comments in a month from now, 

5 but if we receive comments within -- a few 

6 days after that comment period ending, we 

7 should be fine. So, thank you for coming. 

8 MR. BROOKMAN: Safe travels. 

9 (Whereupon, the proceedings went 

10 off the record at 4:46:19 p.m.) 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 384

A

ability 22:20 24:4

228:10 248:17

able 32:5 48:1,9

63:8 101:5 118:2

145:18 165:18

169:4 179:6 235:2

264:9,14 265:12

271:18 274:17

291:17 324:2

325:13 331:22

336:21 351:4

376:22

above-entitled

177:22

absence 276:14

277:5

absolute 161:12

absolutely 40:10

219:10 317:13

academia 85:9

124:10 134:4

153:22

academic 154:4

ACCA 181:3,3

accept 249:20

336:17

access 82:8

accommodate

126:6 223:20

accomplish 352:15

account 31:5 99:5

119:7 141:15

142:2 143:12

148:7 161:3 190:7

237:5,9 253:19

256:21 263:5

329:4 358:10

accounted 98:22

118:21 119:1

190:8 242:13

accounting 76:8

accounts 139:15

182:11,12 189:22

193:20 205:15

252:16

accumulation

90:19

accuracy 23:9

191:8

accurate 132:21

154:8 164:8

193:18 194:2

293:15 304:13

305:18

acknowledges

331:18

acquiring 183:20

acronyms 65:6

activities 327:7

activity 23:17

323:18 355:11,13

356:20

actual 30:21 43:7

50:15 90:19 91:9

109:19 132:19

181:2 211:14

225:15,18 235:17

252:3 255:13

277:6 309:3

326:20 328:20

329:2 344:21

345:4

adapt 126:15

add 18:20 93:20,22

169:2 180:16

197:6 214:11

221:10,17,20

233:16 241:10

262:8 271:11

275:11,12,18,18

279:12 326:4

344:4 369:20

372:1

added 18:10 105:3

162:8 205:17

208:15 266:21

295:13

adding 94:13

104:17 149:10,14

149:15 162:12

196:22 197:5,5

234:5 241:1

275:17 297:3

352:16

addition 9:11 16:18

26:20 28:3 31:21

92:6 157:8 182:15

183:11 206:7

263:16 267:2

375:2

additional 4:19

10:15 13:5 16:2

18:20 19:11,16

20:13 32:10 54:20

63:13 75:15,18

83:8 85:19 93:11

123:11 126:11

134:14,16 136:2

138:8 141:16

146:21 164:19

181:22 191:12

219:6 237:12

241:1,10 244:10

255:1 273:1

320:14 321:8

322:17 332:20

357:13 376:9

381:15

additions 89:11

address 91:12 99:6

113:16 122:20

193:6 311:8 347:9

357:21 378:10

addressed 69:20

348:15

addressing 242:7

adds 161:13 335:19

adequately 118:7

364:2

Adjourn 3:15

adjust 153:12

adjustable 29:3

122:3

Adjuvant 2:12 8:2

administration

236:2 355:15

adopt 126:7 127:6

adopted 126:17

128:6 132:8

adopting 126:16,22

advanced 96:16

105:3

advantage 73:3

90:8 96:1 100:19

235:15

adverse 97:17

advisement 18:8

affect 103:21 107:5

145:5 349:21

350:1,13 360:8

affiliation 5:8 12:5

afford 252:14

afternoon 11:7

34:17 61:9 166:17

167:2 232:12

Ag 265:21

agencies 44:22

46:11 55:6,6 56:5

agenda 3:2 8:20 9:3

9:4 11:6 13:1

61:17 64:16

173:17 179:11

aggregate 140:6

185:22 205:18

280:2 310:14

312:15

aggregated 190:22

197:16 248:4

279:21

aging 364:13

ago 5:1 283:12

297:16 353:2

370:22

agree 39:20 47:2

56:13 64:11 78:15

81:11 99:20 111:9

111:18,20 116:1

214:1 220:7

317:19 318:16

333:1 337:17

365:9 374:17

agreed 223:9

agreement 128:7

147:15 310:12

agreements 167:9

Agricultural

265:18

ahead 79:11 81:12

81:22 100:14

106:18 161:17

164:12 192:18

198:11 213:9,9

214:10 219:3

220:5 221:19

244:13 255:21

256:1 258:21

261:9 270:16

301:7 307:21

322:2 326:1 336:6

343:2,6,15 361:9

372:9 373:19

AHRI 1:13 23:15

23:16,19 27:7

58:4,12 74:18

75:9 98:16 127:22

136:6 137:1 150:1

168:14 204:18

210:17 211:18

212:1 213:3,6,13

256:4 280:1

323:11 330:19

332:22

ain't 329:22

air 6:13 13:2 20:9

41:4 50:12,15,18

54:1 58:6 95:9

100:11 162:4,11

181:5 300:19,22

328:8 329:14

334:19 345:7

371:11 373:7,13

373:18 374:3,11

374:13 375:16

Alabama 344:9

alarmed 346:16

aligned 15:3

Alliance 8:3

allocate 346:3

allocated 11:6

allow 38:21 58:21

68:2 352:18 373:7

373:12

allowance 58:16

70:6

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 385

allowed 126:2

140:2 335:16

381:12

allowing 315:16

316:7 353:2 371:1

allows 21:8 35:16

amaze 31:8

amazed 13:11

ambient 80:15 81:2

81:16 92:7 95:9

amenable 381:2

America 266:9

288:15

American 2:3,14

6:1 13:8 65:17

269:6 283:3 290:3

amount 20:8 52:16

145:11 170:14

182:3 208:1 245:8

248:20 278:1

300:10 327:11

329:9 375:20

379:3

Amrane 1:13 6:13

6:13 74:18,18

98:16,16 99:3,13

99:17,20 127:22

127:22 150:1,1

168:13,14,18

169:3,9 256:4,4

256:13,20 280:3,3

313:1,6,10 323:11

323:11 332:22,22

analogous 304:16

analyses 3:10 10:2

10:4,4,6 14:13

91:17 106:4

166:22 176:2,8,8

176:13 297:8

309:20 311:2,7,8

analysis 1:4 3:5,5,6

3:6,7,7,8,9,10,11

3:12 4:17 9:14,15

9:19,19,20,21

10:1 26:8 27:4,17

27:18 28:6,7 31:7

35:7 36:1,6,7,8,10

36:11,16,18,22

52:10 60:22 65:9

65:15 66:1,15

90:15 91:4,5 97:5

97:10,19 99:5

100:20 101:1

103:6,9,17 104:2

104:4 105:15

106:3 107:7

108:19 110:2,3

112:8 117:9

118:20 123:10

124:7 128:18

130:3,16 131:8

133:17 138:13

145:22 148:8

153:13 166:6,18

167:7 168:3,19

172:12,14,16

176:2 179:17,21

179:22 180:5,11

196:11 197:10

200:7 202:21

203:19 212:3

224:19 225:19,22

226:2 229:4,22

232:10,21,22,22

233:2,10,13

234:22 235:5,5

236:4,17 237:2

240:7 241:12

243:14 245:13

248:16 250:5,22

255:4,17 256:3

258:15,17 261:8

261:10,16 262:6

262:15 263:12,14

263:20 264:2,21

264:22 288:13

289:4 292:9 295:2

295:5,15 296:13

296:18 297:9,16

297:20 298:6,8

299:1,7,13,15

300:12 301:18

302:1,16 304:12

305:1,15,21

308:22 309:1

310:17 312:1

325:17 329:9

341:13

analytical 16:15

212:4

analyze 104:7

105:21 203:7

309:15

analyzed 160:12

203:17

analyzing 109:14

Andersen 8:7,7

243:6,6

ANDERSON 1:13

and/or 315:3

322:12

anecdotally 286:8

annual 58:9 180:1

203:1 224:1

235:21 240:21

241:14 242:1

260:5 284:2

annually 110:12

139:22

answer 69:11 93:21

162:13 185:15

186:16 193:9

227:10 233:4,10

233:13 234:2

240:17 256:5

258:19 261:1

269:15 270:7

271:18 272:3,16

answered 234:10

answers 349:8

anti 24:20

anticipated 379:11

anti-backsliding

381:18

anti-sweat 79:2

88:10,12,14

anybody 9:5 10:14

147:5 167:19

193:12 280:13

311:17 376:9

anybody's 357:11

anymore 118:3

anyway 24:9

221:16 256:14

291:15

anyways 111:10

apart 221:4

apologize 92:22

93:4,5

apparent 153:8

appeared 288:22

appears 24:13

196:19

appendix 65:4

appliance 2:4 4:15

6:17 20:5,18,19

22:9,10 27:10

62:9 87:3 126:2

330:9 335:3

336:14 347:5

appliances 265:8,9

335:7 354:13

applicable 86:3

99:11 181:17

182:2 359:3

369:14

application 30:22

31:2 39:13 84:12

87:13 95:14 98:19

98:21 286:18

applications 94:8

applied 47:9

154:22 155:10

200:6 298:9 343:5

applies 290:18

372:11

apply 227:21 300:5

333:21 351:14

365:11 370:2

381:20

applying 315:1

apportion 266:3,10

appreciate 23:15

32:15 103:14

159:22 177:4

196:3 294:15

376:16 379:9

382:5,17

appreciated 37:2

187:20 314:12

327:17

approach 11:12

39:14,16 58:17

62:16,16 63:5

104:21,22 106:1

121:5 276:15

310:21 340:21,22

350:7 378:7

approached 308:10

approaches 16:15

313:22

appropriately

63:20

approve 43:18

approving 43:17

approximate

362:17,22

approximately

20:8 149:7 218:11

April 35:8

architect 326:6

architectural 84:21

area 47:21 55:1

70:7,12,14,14

76:2,15,15,21

77:1 79:4,16,17

350:17 362:15

areas 29:12 36:5

91:21 324:17

argue 49:2,7

ARI 37:19

Aris 6:22 166:7,8

ARISTOTLE 2:4

array 69:14

arrive 77:17

212:22

arrived 148:15

arrives 83:13

arrow 111:7 188:6

188:9

art 327:13

ASHRAE 63:22

132:8,9 133:4

174:6 240:5

259:14 379:16,22

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 386

aside 167:18

asked 151:4 307:20

313:17

asking 107:20

159:6 163:1,13

165:13 258:3

264:7 282:21

322:5 346:12

351:8 365:17

aspect 324:19

aspects 142:7,19

174:15 349:12

350:9

assemble 44:19

45:1 314:17 315:1

322:11,15 325:12

332:7,9

assembled 45:5

325:19 327:1

328:22 358:16,17

assembler 29:20,22

33:10 40:9,11

316:2,3,8 321:14

321:17,19 322:10

322:14 324:21

326:5 328:9,17

337:18 338:8,9

371:4

assemblers 341:5

348:9

assembles 44:7

318:19

assemblies 49:9

assembling 30:3

48:8

assembly 41:17

42:10 43:6,8,18

46:7,12,21 48:4

54:5,5 62:19

317:10 318:4

322:14

assess 243:10 309:4

assessment 3:4,11

10:5 36:7,16

64:17 66:13 85:3

85:3

assessments 9:14

assigned 66:22

199:17

associated 26:16

27:1 51:7 53:8

64:12 89:1 123:11

139:15 141:16

146:21 228:9

272:8 314:21

353:4 371:17

associating 141:3

association 181:4

274:9 334:6

associations 181:3

184:18

assume 236:10,19

242:11 277:21

300:4,10 339:10

assumed 140:11

227:1 238:3 288:5

299:16 315:8

assumes 75:11

assuming 53:20

111:3 128:12

151:11,13 171:1

218:10 304:13

305:17

assumption 105:20

158:7,19 207:9

212:4 227:5 237:6

239:21 241:18

250:13 276:18

277:14 288:13

293:2 315:12

assumptions 31:9

31:12 93:18 103:8

103:12 105:13

106:13,14 123:22

124:8 133:17,20

139:5 140:18

153:14 158:17

159:1 163:14

167:6 206:10,19

208:21 210:7

211:18,19,20

217:8 218:9 222:2

227:6 289:4 304:5

304:14 305:18

311:10 344:6

345:8

assure 60:22

assuring 47:3

ASTM 358:12,16

358:19,20 362:1

364:7,18 366:2

371:10 372:2

ASTMC 57:6

attach 95:6

attached 64:8

71:22 272:12

attempt 141:18

158:12 301:20

attempted 328:20

attempting 41:3

303:2

attended 179:9

attending 16:22,22

382:9,22

attention 10:12

55:15 238:6

250:22 363:11

attesting 319:22

attributed 91:8

139:13 161:2

atypical 27:5

authorities 52:15

authority 48:13

auto 119:4

automatic 62:20

377:14 378:2

automatically

378:5

available 31:10

33:3 97:15 112:12

115:17 123:8,12

124:1,9 139:20

148:3 168:15

170:4 217:19

218:3 220:13

249:12 347:22

Avenue 1:9

average 70:13

147:18 198:1,4,13

201:5 207:1,3

211:4,8,10 212:12

212:18 218:12

222:7 236:3 249:6

255:6,20,22 257:4

257:8 265:13

278:13 282:20

286:7 340:7

367:13

averaged 146:13

aware 102:19,20

131:6

Awareness 2:4 6:17

axes 161:6

axis 160:14 217:12

224:10

A-F-T-E-R-N-O-...

178:20

a.m 1:10 4:2 129:2

129:4,16 176:19

B

B 2:9

back 4:22 12:1

16:19 34:5 61:10

75:21 76:17 79:13

82:1,16 89:16

110:19,21 130:6

144:9 145:15

161:22 177:16,19

178:22 188:9

190:19 194:4

199:15 228:22

248:6,21 249:3

257:14 267:9

278:21 282:6

283:6 284:4

285:18 291:5

292:12 294:18,21

295:3 303:13

304:19 322:4

327:21 331:8

337:14 339:8

340:1 342:1,17

344:1 348:22

363:16 365:7

375:22 380:18

382:6

backed 101:6

backs 132:14

backstop 63:11

backwards 261:12

back-up 95:2

bad 31:5 48:10

77:8 220:3 362:8

badge 177:7

badges 129:8

badly 114:21

balance 87:8 175:7

181:10 214:2

379:12

Ballo 1:14 8:5,5

ballpark 193:14

194:20 280:7

285:12

Baltimore 4:5

Bandyopadhyay

1:15 73:12,16

74:15 179:13,14

185:13 186:1,9,12

187:6,10,13

188:13 189:10

192:1 194:9,17

195:20 196:9

198:17 199:4,8,11

199:13 201:22

202:3,9,12,18

210:12 213:2,5

216:5 219:1,7,10

221:12 222:16

223:18 225:17

226:9 227:6 232:6

247:15 281:2

bank 74:9

barrier 24:19 88:8

157:21 369:22

370:1

barriers 157:6

base 26:9,15,19

27:8 102:7 116:21

145:16 180:21

195:13 226:18

228:20 233:21

251:8,11 263:17

265:4 266:9

267:18 277:11

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 387

based 13:20 23:14

23:15 27:4 33:2

37:20 47:12 57:5

67:9 86:6,22

97:11 109:2

112:16 118:1

120:4 123:21

124:8 128:4 131:3

132:6,9,15 134:3

135:4,7 136:6

146:7 148:3 202:4

206:9 211:17

214:20 217:8

223:2 244:16

249:6 256:15,16

257:3 264:12

269:1 273:14

281:19 290:4

291:2 313:19

327:22 329:17

330:11 340:4

341:9 342:18

344:13 345:11,16

354:7 355:14

359:13,18 361:6

369:9 380:11

baseline 104:12

105:3,4 107:14

145:3 148:22

149:5,11,13 150:2

152:14 158:8,16

158:20 159:1

161:10 175:14

181:14,16 182:1

196:13 224:7,11

224:12,13 225:3,8

226:19 227:12

231:13 233:6

234:7 322:1

333:17

baselines 144:21

158:11

BASF 2:2 6:12

basic 48:3 59:12

124:21 233:9

250:20 314:3

349:13,16 350:11

351:13,18 352:8

353:1,5

basically 16:14

52:19 60:3 62:13

66:19 79:15,22

123:17 142:6

148:8 162:1

214:18 295:10

320:5 321:3

333:14 341:5

basing 256:7

basis 125:2 133:13

156:22 163:20

208:1 268:6 380:9

basket 179:7

Bayer 2:8 6:3

bear 139:6

beast 345:12

bed 364:15

beefed 33:8

Beeton 1:16 7:16

7:16 90:2,2 92:18

92:18 93:2,6,9,13

100:2 164:13,13

221:8,8,13 238:1

238:1 239:9

beginning 130:3

145:4 310:1

behalf 4:14 5:15

19:19

believe 38:16 71:7

134:7 158:10

167:4 184:4

189:20 200:18

243:18 267:9

280:20 292:11,17

316:15 343:3

believes 189:20

352:15

believing 329:8

bell 113:18 115:14

beneficial 127:18

167:18 246:20

benefit 63:13

100:16 101:4,8

109:7 125:3,13

173:15 200:5

296:2

benefits 296:3,7

298:3

benefit/cost 28:9

best 11:21 33:2

39:14 42:9 153:11

193:8,9 215:11

228:21,22 264:9

266:16 281:19

320:13 324:11

347:3 376:19

Betsy 6:18 173:18

173:19 262:7

356:22 357:1

better 19:10 33:17

109:17 113:10

120:12,12 127:1

144:22 146:4,5

175:14 200:21

214:3 215:21

228:21,21 246:21

259:7 300:17

312:5,16 342:12

378:7

beyond 219:8

227:3 228:1

291:22

bidding 201:10,13

big 59:3 60:13

65:19 133:12

153:3 159:18

177:11 184:13

220:15 244:22

245:7 281:22

344:4 364:5

bigger 66:7 114:6

141:14 175:14

220:13 244:15

245:3 291:3

biggest 112:5

bight 266:19

bill 238:7 340:14

billed 143:6

billions 305:16

Bilt 159:11

bit 111:21 123:4

128:1 145:19

148:14 151:7

166:4 172:10

173:7 193:4 197:8

254:11 259:12

264:17 287:8

288:2 295:9 300:3

304:17 327:2

330:7,8 353:18

355:18 382:13,18

bits 147:18

BLA 211:6

black 82:3

blade 91:9

blades 91:2,3,10

BLH 210:21

211:12

blindsiding 320:10

blips 221:1

BLL 211:12

blower 50:16 54:2

63:17

blue 196:14 197:4

225:10 234:19

289:6

board 279:17

Bohn 212:10

bolts 231:2

bomb 192:15

bonus 175:6

borne 200:11

boss 13:13

bothered 51:13

53:10

bottle 94:22

bottom 131:13

266:6 305:11

351:1 373:17

bought 122:2

bounce 194:4

bouncing 365:7

box 25:6 38:4 39:22

44:3 46:3 54:5

55:22 56:1,18

57:17 60:16 72:2

72:5,8,10,19 74:1

74:3 80:13 81:1

82:4,4 84:12,14

100:11 108:2

112:5 113:9 151:9

151:15 152:7

180:2 186:7 187:5

188:15,18 205:7

205:10,10,12

206:13 207:10

210:14,16,22,22

211:2,3,8,10,16

212:16 216:14

218:10 224:8,9

226:4 237:13

241:7 244:11,18

245:4,5,7 251:5

279:4 317:10

318:13 323:13

358:13 359:2

360:2 361:19

362:19 365:17,18

366:2,7,8,14

367:9 368:14

boxes 15:21 21:12

37:10 39:10,11

44:11 46:12 59:2

72:13 105:19

110:10 113:7

136:11 151:7

152:8,18 180:8,15

205:1,20,21

224:20 268:12

273:14,18 360:4

Boy 162:21

brainstorm 85:8

brainstorming

97:7 123:18

break 9:15,17 10:7

46:15 113:5

125:17 128:17,22

129:1,2 244:15

294:5,10 308:10

312:2

breakdown 292:13

breaking 278:4

breaks 16:1

Brenda 179:7

BRETT 2:7

bridging 121:2

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 388

124:13

brief 9:6 15:14

17:19 29:12

308:17 309:21

311:5

briefly 9:3 130:9

160:8 179:16

185:14 226:16

250:3 262:17

308:18 311:2

brilliant 162:20

bring 55:14

bringing 19:21

100:10

brings 101:15

147:1

Britt 1:16 8:9,9

broad 85:8 123:6

164:1 184:8

227:15,17

broader 21:18

brochures 85:11

broke 241:20

broken 63:2 88:9

274:10 282:2

Brookman 1:10,12

4:3,5 5:4 8:15

15:12 17:14 19:5

29:7 32:8 37:8

39:3,15 40:8

46:13 48:11 52:6

52:9 53:1 54:16

55:19 56:1,11

57:16 59:16,18

60:20 61:14 64:13

68:12 69:12 70:3

70:18 71:9,15

73:5,10,14 74:14

74:17 75:6,13

77:21 78:10,14,17

79:10,18 80:4,10

80:20 81:3,12,22

82:14 83:5,14

84:18,22 86:8

87:17 89:4,9,19

89:21 90:11 91:18

92:11,22 93:4,7

93:10 94:5 95:17

96:4 97:4 98:1,7,9

98:14 99:8,22

100:8,12 101:11

102:1,21 106:20

109:8 110:17

111:16 113:3,14

115:1 116:10

117:4 118:5,11

119:15 123:14

124:15 125:15

127:21 128:15,21

129:22 133:1,7

134:8,11 136:2,10

136:15,17 138:8

140:20 141:10

142:4,18 144:1,15

145:6 147:17,21

151:1 153:15,18

154:5 155:14,20

156:14 157:10,14

158:5 159:2,8,21

161:19 162:18

164:12 166:7

168:12 169:15

170:18 171:7,10

173:18 174:12,17

175:2,19 176:15

178:22 185:8,14

187:22 189:1,9

191:11 192:10,18

193:10 194:10

195:4,18 196:5,8

198:11,21 199:22

200:16 201:15,19

202:2,7,11,15

209:2,15,19,22

210:2,6,11 212:7

212:21 213:4,7,16

214:5,9 215:16,20

216:1,4 218:5,20

219:2,13 220:5

221:2,6,18 222:10

222:13 223:6,17

225:15 226:7,14

227:4,9,15,19,22

229:8,13,19

230:10 231:12,22

232:5 237:19

239:6,13 240:19

242:17 243:4,12

243:19 244:12

245:9,19 246:7

247:7,12 248:6

251:22 252:4

253:13 254:2

256:17 257:13

259:10 260:9,19

260:22 261:3

262:7,11,16,20

263:9 267:14

268:13,18,22

269:3,5,18 270:11

270:15 271:1,10

271:13,16 272:19

273:7,11 274:3,20

275:10,21 276:3

278:18,20 279:9

280:1,6,16 282:9

282:19 284:9,13

284:21 285:4,11

285:14 286:16

287:5,19 290:1

291:8 293:7,18,21

294:1,4 295:1

301:6,16 303:10

305:22 306:10,18

307:20 308:6,9

311:12 312:17,22

313:4,11 316:14

317:14,17 318:3

318:14 319:2,7

320:19 321:12,17

321:22 322:16

323:9 324:18

325:5,8,22 327:19

332:18 333:22

336:4,7 337:3

338:13,17 340:15

341:2 342:22

343:14,19 344:2

347:6,21 348:5,10

348:14,18,21

350:19,21 351:4,9

351:22 353:16

356:10,14,22

357:7,17 359:6

360:18 361:9

362:6 363:10

364:1 365:20

367:19 368:3,11

369:18 370:4

372:6,20 373:19

374:6,8,22 375:7

376:3,7 377:14,22

381:6 382:2 383:8

brought 20:4 21:11

98:4 164:18 330:4

361:12,13 364:11

375:16

Btu 116:19 175:11

175:13,16 217:16

219:16 220:1

222:21 272:10

328:12 329:19

BTUs 114:16,17

216:15,17,21

220:9,19 230:1,1

271:22

bubble 291:19

Budget's 298:5

build 14:20,21

28:15 45:20 46:3

57:1 108:1 114:10

121:12,15 122:18

259:21 283:16

317:22

builder 328:10,17

building 1:9 4:15

27:20 43:16 44:14

44:17 46:10 49:4

49:21 50:2,7,9,22

53:16 61:21 62:7

63:19 83:8,9

129:9,11 177:8

193:22 210:6

258:9 265:5,15

299:11,12 301:1

301:11 326:6

328:4,5,6,11,12

328:22 329:1

332:4 333:16,18

334:2,6,11 335:13

335:21 336:12,13

336:15,20 337:8

343:11

buildings 44:12

50:3 64:2 265:9

265:11,19 271:4

288:15

build-up 96:17

built 31:11 44:11

bulbs 135:16

bulk 139:12

bullet 320:20

bunch 165:10,15

335:20

burden 309:8,12

320:2,6 321:13

335:14 347:15

352:13,13 353:4,6

371:17

burdening 42:20

burdensome

315:20 318:2

burden-reducing

353:10

burn 298:22

business 13:17,19

13:22 14:12 30:14

34:3 179:4 182:13

183:12 184:4,14

184:19 187:4

257:5,6 284:15

290:21 359:21

377:4

businesses 148:5

182:20

busy 129:14

button 12:18

buy 22:10 188:12

273:20 284:17

335:8

buying 22:17

184:18 220:10

237:12 284:19

buys 44:4 285:8

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 389

C

C 4:1

cabinet 37:21

141:15,17

cabinets 66:9

cafeteria 177:11,14

CALBO 334:4

calculate 107:8

109:5 259:3

276:16 279:16

341:8 347:16

352:18 363:2,3

367:15,16 374:16

calculated 105:2,5

130:13,22 132:4

149:5,11 176:13

240:11

calculates 249:5

calculating 367:3

calculation 58:8

131:2 206:16

249:7 262:22

338:22 344:7,19

347:20

calculational

345:15

calculations 45:21

197:18 206:5

325:18

California 2:11

5:15 7:19 19:20

20:1 27:11,19

49:14 50:4 52:3

54:12,21 126:1,21

128:4,5,12 228:1

282:9 334:6

381:10,16,20

California's 20:5

call 10:12 24:7

82:21 83:2 149:19

176:6 184:5,8

196:12 213:9

240:11 251:8

272:8 287:8

363:11

called 111:10

179:21 181:11

182:4 217:2 309:4

362:13

calls 21:17

candor 382:6

capacity 28:22 52:7

92:20 101:17

122:6 136:8,9

160:22 161:3,5,13

161:14,15 164:19

164:20,22,22

165:17 211:14,14

216:9 217:3,4,9

217:12,15,19,19

218:3 219:19

272:1 294:8

capital 240:9 249:6

257:4,8

capture 123:10

206:3 226:4

253:12 285:22

captured 89:6

101:7 205:9

236:16

captures 121:3

225:11

cap-and-trade

238:7

card 179:7 377:5

cards 179:4

care 79:1 329:21

340:10,12

careful 117:16

322:9

carefully 30:16

331:9 359:17

Carlo 255:2

Carpenter 1:21,22

6:11 7:15 366:1

carries 355:15

cascade 92:2

case 21:4,5 26:9,15

26:19 37:21,22

38:2 39:3 46:3

47:20 53:16 56:10

58:20 69:6 79:3

94:10 165:3

226:18 233:5,21

251:8,11 277:17

299:14 300:5

304:16 305:9

321:12,18 326:19

328:9 330:4

333:21 345:10

378:6

cases 22:1 26:5

29:21,22 32:1

41:13 45:19 48:18

153:5 158:14

215:5 254:10

302:19 304:11

316:11 328:7

374:1

cash 309:16

cast 311:15

catalog 16:12 22:13

28:14 51:17 60:3

cataloged 59:15

catalogue 223:2

catch 176:21 294:8

categories 117:17

281:22

categorize 77:10

109:16

categorized 66:20

category 47:7

59:19 60:2 75:1

86:13 89:7 154:18

255:1 348:8

causing 337:3

caution 128:11

129:1

cautious 31:3

291:21

ceiling 72:10 88:3

122:21 154:19

155:2

cell 12:13

census 265:17,18

265:21

cents 256:19

certain 34:7 46:16

57:5,22 61:2

75:12 93:18 97:11

98:19 99:11 108:3

146:20 167:22

168:22 172:11

220:12 248:19

271:8 281:16

328:14,15 335:17

351:14 359:9

370:9,15

certainly 70:6

88:22 173:14

306:8 380:20

certainty 321:9

certificate 336:22

certification 43:14

51:7 57:15 58:13

320:16 321:6

324:1,13 337:4

353:8,19 354:15

355:10 356:5,6,9

certified 23:11

326:11

certify 33:9 44:14

324:9 325:14,15

326:12 336:13,21

339:22

certifying 43:16

44:3 45:7,12

cetera 290:22

349:18 375:6

CFL 135:17

chain 140:15

143:12 182:12

184:17 188:22

200:7 252:16

chains 26:3 182:19

182:19 184:13

193:21 196:6

254:4,5,10 283:18

chair 5:9

chamber 369:3

chance 8:16 78:1

122:15 350:22

351:1

change 38:11 78:4

107:3,4,11 108:7

111:4 141:4

153:13 154:19

230:21 234:9

299:16 340:6

351:6

changed 62:3

changeover 122:10

changes 83:18 87:3

141:6 350:4

364:19

changing 81:18

350:2 352:3

channel 180:15,22

191:10

channels 180:19

182:8 183:19

187:8 189:4,18

191:4,9 199:18

200:14

chapter 67:5

104:20 141:21

145:1,8 150:22

158:22 168:20,20

191:15 193:2

203:15,15 234:14

characteristic

67:16

characteristics

67:2,10 349:21,22

characterization

202:21 295:10

characterizations

108:18

characterize 66:17

103:17 115:19

180:18 292:21

301:19 328:20

characterized

149:3 193:13

charge 238:18,18

238:22

charged 235:13

246:15

charging 15:9

Charles 4:11 6:20

15:13,19 37:8

40:12 41:19 45:3

53:2 61:6 95:17

95:18 102:11

109:11 110:13,18

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 390

126:18 144:17

147:2 150:8 154:7

157:16 165:22

167:10 176:18

246:18 256:17

301:8 313:11

319:10 320:19

321:1 322:5

326:14 339:18

341:16 345:18

349:2 354:1 355:5

377:2,22 382:7

Charlie 2:12 8:1

49:12 75:19,20

103:6 131:11

133:1 151:1,2

159:11 168:21

169:15,16 170:18

172:7 253:4

261:14 262:14

278:18,19 280:10

280:17 291:8,9

307:10 326:1,1

327:19,20 333:1

343:2 344:2,3

362:6,7 373:19,20

Charlie's 61:19

78:17

chart 134:15 176:3

190:10 199:15

200:18 217:11

220:8 223:12,20

232:2 269:8 277:3

charts 189:15

cheaper 300:4

cheat 65:6

check 48:11 52:14

157:1 335:4,14

343:4 380:21

checking 376:19

Chemistry 2:14

choice 250:8

choose 146:17

269:19

chose 104:4,6,8

115:5

chosen 111:20

circuit 26:12

circumstances

100:6 292:1

citation 314:17

Claire 1:19 7:6

109:21 270:7

272:5 279:12

281:1 285:16,17

290:16 322:1,3,18

338:6

clarification 96:19

100:13 102:22

150:2 155:5

156:10,17 157:15

167:12 260:14

270:18 285:19

295:22 314:20

339:19 365:21

clarifications

272:20

clarified 268:4

clarify 65:18 69:2

102:16 172:15

219:5 257:2,20

267:20 271:2

278:7 297:19

317:3 356:7 357:2

clarifying 271:15

272:3,15 279:1

clarity 303:9 347:8

370:5

class 47:16 68:9,11

70:9,15 76:13

77:5,19,20 86:7

104:6 105:1

108:10 251:21

266:4 302:17

304:8 305:13

classes 36:20 47:19

48:3 66:21,21

67:6,13,21,21

68:5,14 69:14,18

70:5,19 71:10

75:16 80:1 86:2

110:1,4 116:17

117:8 150:11,21

203:20,22 244:3

250:17 265:2

266:4,11 267:1,8

273:3 292:14

304:4 334:2

classification 82:13

cleaning 236:22

clear 60:21 96:13

141:4 215:9

241:18

clearer 68:17

clearly 173:11

climate 1:16 7:17

203:7 255:15

climb 51:13

close 73:14 247:13

345:3,6,9 362:21

closed 213:19

374:6,7

closely 87:2 323:19

327:15

closer 113:12

222:12 223:4

274:2,18

closers 62:20

closes 166:15

168:11

closest 217:4

221:15

closing 3:14 10:11

10:13,20 381:7

382:7

closure 376:12

coal 298:22 299:1

code 46:2 49:14

50:6 52:15 62:7

153:2 314:18

328:11,12 333:9

333:10,11,18

coded 251:16

codes 19:21 333:20

coffee 95:3 129:12

coil 125:4,12 136:8

141:14 161:11

245:21

coils 24:16 90:15

colleague 103:2

colleagues 328:19

collect 181:9

collectively 68:6

collects 235:12

Collin 2:15 7:8

color 188:17

196:12 251:16

352:7

colored 205:21

302:18 303:4

colors 136:10

column 196:17

210:19

columns 198:14

combination

107:17 158:1

176:9 180:2

256:11 258:13

combinations

36:19 56:16 59:12

93:17 265:1 305:3

combine 76:12

79:14 357:5

combined 94:3

131:20 204:4

224:2

combines 203:12

come 18:6 29:18

34:22 38:6 53:14

53:19 56:13 61:10

76:16 97:8 167:3

170:6 175:10

215:11 240:10

283:6 284:4,12

297:6 331:20

339:20 344:1,20

345:3,6,8,15

362:21 379:7

comes 41:15 78:19

188:9 246:12

250:12 256:18

277:15 285:7

337:21 375:10

377:18

comfortable 189:6

300:3 337:9

382:13

coming 38:5 45:12

68:20 110:19

166:13 172:9,13

206:8 208:1 227:8

235:4 255:21

256:1 342:17

347:8 383:7

coming-on 119:12

commence 125:16

comment 16:5 18:2

37:3,9,10,11

68:13 69:17 71:10

78:16,17 80:3,21

82:2,14 85:16

89:5,8 93:14 96:6

96:22 97:21 104:9

105:18,19 106:18

108:17 115:18,20

116:9,11 128:20

131:6 133:16

134:12 136:3

139:5 140:7,10,18

142:7 143:19,21

144:13 146:18

147:8 148:16

151:18 160:9

161:18 163:13

166:10,11,15

168:10 171:9

172:1 173:1

187:19 189:2,2

191:12 193:4,12

194:13,21 214:12

226:8 242:7 243:9

244:11 255:1

260:12 275:8

278:16 280:22

288:2 289:16

306:12,17,20

307:6 313:9

316:13 321:3

340:19 347:11

353:13,13,15

357:8 368:13

369:12 371:14

382:1 383:2,6

commented 146:6

comments 4:19

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 391

11:1,22 13:10

15:14,21 16:1,2,3

16:7,8,12 17:1

18:12,14 19:2,7

23:14,17 25:18

29:8,11 32:9,10

32:15,17 33:14

37:2,4 39:15

61:19 68:13 69:13

75:14,15,18 85:12

86:9,14 87:20

93:11 96:5 103:14

106:12,17 115:13

118:14 125:19

130:7,7 131:9

138:15,16 142:11

142:21 144:15

147:22 148:11

149:22 153:12

164:7 167:13,15

168:9,10 172:6

175:21 176:15

185:10 191:2,12

196:4,5 198:7

200:22 202:16

208:20 210:4

211:19 221:22

223:12,19 232:1,2

237:15 243:13,16

243:18 256:2

257:11 273:1

274:4 275:22,22

292:5 293:1,8

294:2,15 300:13

305:22 311:9

312:13 313:20

314:8,12 315:15

316:1 322:17

327:16 331:14,18

332:20 340:20

343:17 349:16

357:15,21 359:4

359:14,18 360:19

363:13 365:10

366:1 372:8 375:8

376:10 382:3,21

383:4,5

commercial 20:9

20:15,20 28:16

64:2 71:4 73:18

75:22 265:5

281:13

commercialized

23:8

commercially

97:15

commit 383:3

commitment 347:2

committee 213:12

214:5

common 11:18

74:5,12 109:1

113:2 235:10

299:22

companies 148:4

167:9

company 6:11 7:15

14:2 39:4,7,7,9,11

143:7 147:12

290:7 324:20

comparable 287:13

compared 21:1

74:12 79:3 165:4

366:9 375:18

compares 367:9

comparing 245:11

compelled 91:20

competency 48:15

competition 14:12

22:21 201:9

competitive 22:19

24:21

competitors 55:12

complete 12:8,8

89:10 91:20

203:11 204:8,20

239:12 287:16

346:20 363:20

371:21 375:13,14

completed 232:17

completely 34:14

324:5

completeness 191:9

complex 122:16

335:22

compliance 29:16

30:8,12 49:14

54:4,15 62:7

314:3 315:7 316:6

316:19 317:4,6,9

320:15 321:6

343:13 353:6,7,19

354:6,7,15 355:9

356:4,6,8

compliant 22:15

323:3

complicated

377:21

complied 51:21

complies 338:1

comply 52:4 53:21

53:22 62:11 68:3

150:6 318:21

319:6 341:5 381:4

complying 315:10

318:20

component 28:21

29:1 40:22 41:1

45:1 47:15,19

55:16,20 56:9,16

63:10 66:14 76:18

78:20 135:7

139:18 141:5

146:20 165:1

287:18 315:16,18

315:19 316:10,16

316:17,19 318:10

319:4,18,20 324:9

328:16,16,16

329:2,11 330:5

335:19 338:3,10

338:11 341:12,14

342:2 358:1,3

367:6 371:1

components 22:20

23:2 24:8 28:20

29:18 34:7 38:10

42:4 46:16 48:3

57:21 58:22 86:16

87:5 116:18 121:4

124:14 205:6

206:12 208:16

229:6 250:10

315:3 317:12

318:2 319:6,19

322:13 324:10

325:13 331:6

333:15 335:18

337:19 338:12

343:9,12 349:20

356:19 358:2

367:12 375:5

composing 319:11

composite 369:8

compresser 87:4

compressor 90:8

101:16 116:22

117:19,21 136:9

137:17,19 141:8

163:4,7 165:2

205:14 223:3

230:7,22 231:5

283:7 287:15

compressors 42:8

59:13 74:9 90:5,5

92:16,17 95:2

112:10,13 116:18

163:17,18 222:17

226:19 230:8

279:4

computational

132:19

compute 208:14

211:9,11

computed 204:18

225:18

computer 283:11

334:14 338:19

341:20 370:15

computing 207:9

208:18,21

conceivably 325:2

concept 111:22

316:3

concepts 37:18

concern 13:16 66:7

107:22 110:8,9

117:1 363:7

concerned 14:13

30:10 33:18 96:2

330:10 332:6,8

concerning 366:2

concerns 29:13

125:5 344:5

345:14 365:16

concise 13:2

concluded 207:8

conclusion 28:12

146:1

conclusions 94:2

concurrent 34:11

127:9 355:1

condenser 26:21

71:22 72:2 90:9

124:22 125:4,12

141:14 161:11

165:14 204:7

223:3

condensers 28:17

69:4 203:5

condensing 21:2,7

21:19,21 22:5

24:1 38:19 69:2

71:3,12 72:3,16

72:17 73:1,22

74:2 189:13,19

190:3 205:14,15

220:10 245:2,22

247:19 268:9,17

268:19 272:21

273:6 275:11

283:7

condition 72:3

conditioned 62:2

conditioners 162:4

conditioning 6:14

20:9 41:4 58:6

95:9 162:11 181:6

300:20 301:1

328:8 334:19

345:7

conditions 29:5

39:8 83:1 138:5

374:14

conduct 34:9

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 392

255:17 309:18

310:19 316:8

319:4 338:11

341:13 346:10

conducted 36:15

36:18 166:22

176:8

conducting 166:18

309:3 310:2,6,10

311:3

conduction 131:14

358:5,8,11 367:5

375:12

conductivity

366:22

conducts 337:18

338:8

confident 133:11

confidential 312:14

337:7

confidentiality

147:15

configuration

71:20 104:12

configurations

56:18

confirm 319:7

conflict 269:8

confused 278:6

296:1

confusion 73:21

conjunction 63:21

connect 72:15

329:1

connected 75:11

connecting 104:3

conscious 320:16

332:13

consensus 172:11

314:10 350:1

365:6

consequences

30:14

conservation 1:3,4

4:8 8:4 16:16

17:5 33:22 181:20

317:6 321:7,10

325:16 331:21

333:10 339:15

341:19,22

consider 94:8

95:19 111:13

119:2 128:14

137:16 163:3

187:15 209:10

235:9 309:12

353:10 368:6

369:16

considerable

174:22 305:12

consideration

11:17 70:17 90:18

331:15 370:22

considerations

135:18 331:11

considered 94:16

95:14 100:22

123:13 198:4

216:8 224:18

227:12 245:21

352:8 359:18

362:5,5 366:11

considering 39:17

59:4 79:21 117:1

135:7 157:12

186:16 268:6

313:21 314:22

316:2,7 338:4

349:11 350:2,8

351:17 358:12

359:15 370:3,8

371:1,5 372:9

considers 336:19

consist 139:9 279:3

consistent 45:11

73:17 298:4 350:3

consisting 47:21

consists 79:5

180:14 194:22

constantly 168:2

379:5

construction 41:2

46:9 49:4 72:20

349:19

constructions

271:8

constructive 347:7

382:5

Consuelo 1:19 7:20

consultant 26:11

188:11

consultants 2:6

184:22 188:4,7

consulting 1:18,19

2:2,4,12,15 7:1,3

7:5,7,9 8:2 176:17

consumer 233:3,11

233:17 248:18

297:21

consumers 99:12

255:8,21 296:5,10

298:1

consumer's 302:6

consumes 20:7

consumption 21:3

21:7 87:16 103:19

105:2,5,10 107:9

108:9 130:12,22

147:11 158:4

160:16,19 161:5

161:15 162:2

176:12 180:1

203:1,6,11 204:15

204:20 205:5,8,13

205:16,19 206:6

208:19 224:1,14

226:4 265:6 339:2

349:22 350:14,15

350:16 351:19

352:5,10,19

contact 281:8

312:18 334:7

337:5 377:12

contain 207:21

contained 20:22

21:1 71:5,14,18

140:1 150:22

containing 271:5

content 311:17

contention 315:13

contentious 160:7

CONTENTS 3:1

context 249:5

267:21 285:21

296:2,4

continue 30:13

327:11 352:1

368:4

continued 2:1

continuing 10:2

111:7

contractor 30:2

40:6 41:16 183:3

183:6,8 190:2

246:11 284:17

285:7

contractors 31:20

52:13 181:4

190:17

contradict 31:13

contradictory

218:8

contrast 236:18

control 21:8,14

24:12 29:4 40:9

40:11 41:8,18

43:9,10,12,21

44:2,8,9 47:10

49:5,9 79:2 87:10

89:17 90:6 92:20

96:9,10,11 146:3

169:20 175:9

317:22

controlled 26:4

355:11

controllers 24:15

controlling 46:20

170:1

controls 25:2 26:10

28:2,3 59:14

88:11,12 90:10

96:14,15,16

126:13,13,14

136:20 137:2

241:10 369:4

controversy 314:11

convened 1:8

convenience 59:6

112:19 190:6,11

215:7 230:2

249:16 265:14,20

266:18

convenient 72:13

conversation 9:8

12:15 29:13

125:16

conversations

12:21

conversion 298:19

convinced 164:7

cooler 15:7 21:15

24:2 28:19 34:8

51:19 53:17 60:9

60:14 69:8 75:10

77:3,10,13 84:15

88:22 89:2 94:13

114:17 149:3,6

150:11 185:19

188:9 209:6 224:3

245:21 271:9

275:2

coolers 1:4 4:9,17

14:8,10 35:1

49:15 60:10,17

65:21 66:10 76:1

78:5 85:6 94:22

133:5 180:8 186:2

186:19 204:2

207:15 208:8,10

209:20 210:19,20

244:7,17 247:1,21

247:21,22 248:1

274:12 279:4

304:9

coolers/walk-in

150:12

cooler/freezer

66:17

cooling 92:4 94:9

95:8,13 98:18

99:4 100:3 299:11

Copeland 220:10

copies 19:16

copy 8:20 9:3 19:13

156:7 179:8

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 393

corner 56:3

corporations 140:1

correct 33:7 88:11

88:16,19 108:12

110:14 123:22

128:1 137:7,8

147:20 175:1

192:11 214:8

256:9 260:18

262:4 318:22

321:15,21

correctly 87:14

169:19 240:14

257:21 325:20,20

325:21

correlates 155:9

correlation 366:4,6

367:10

correspond 161:10

corresponded

176:4

corresponding

140:3

cosmetically 352:6

cost 3:7 13:21

14:13 25:11 28:6

36:9 101:15,21

105:6,8,9,14,16

109:7 119:21

122:13,18 123:11

130:14,14 138:12

138:14,19 139:1,8

139:9,12 140:13

140:13,16 141:7

142:5,12,19,20

143:3,16,17

144:16 145:4

146:2,4,5,8,20

148:13,19 149:7

153:1,2,8 161:4

161:12,13,22

162:9,12 163:5,7

163:15,16 165:4

165:16 175:16,17

187:15 212:4

230:16 232:20

233:1,15,19 234:3

234:9,13 235:2,6

236:11,11,12,13

236:16 237:11

238:4,11,21

240:22 241:2

242:1 244:1

245:15 248:16

249:6 250:16

251:11,20 252:12

256:16 257:4,8

263:4,8 273:19,21

295:7 296:2,9,21

297:2,15,16,17

298:8,10,12

301:18 303:6,14

303:15,20 304:20

320:11,17 327:12

332:16 335:20

366:9

costing 302:7

costly 24:18 302:18

costs 9:20 14:2 15:2

15:6 105:2 138:15

139:2,14,15

140:21 141:2,10

141:16 142:3,14

159:14 163:17,19

165:14 180:20

181:22 197:8

200:6,9,9,11,13

201:17 232:19

233:6,16,20 234:4

234:5,12,20 235:1

235:7,8 236:9,10

236:15,18,20

237:3,6,16 238:2

238:8 239:7

241:15 242:9,10

243:14,15,22

244:2,8,10 247:9

249:22 253:2

254:15 256:3,6

296:3 299:21

312:4 320:8

couched 173:16

Council 2:14 8:4

371:8

Counsel's 6:19

355:12

counted 28:18

162:19

counting 272:13

country 108:21

212:19 213:15

218:16

county 45:8

couple 4:22 52:16

54:20 64:18 85:18

91:21 104:9

119:16 166:16

193:18,21 194:3

215:8 223:8 238:2

239:16 289:10

315:11 353:2

357:9 368:16

380:2 382:20

coupled 333:7

course 21:10 42:20

60:20 127:3

173:13 180:19

181:3 182:1,15

183:2,7 186:2

203:13 207:7

235:17 240:8

273:16 305:19

Court 381:20

courtesies 11:18

courtesy 179:9

378:6,16

cover 171:12 240:2

250:14 264:11

312:14 315:2

322:12 364:2

coverage 349:1

covered 10:16

94:17 119:10

129:18 243:18

297:16 314:5

332:20 376:11

covering 13:8

263:16

covers 124:12

181:14

CRE 379:17

create 82:13 117:8

174:1 181:10

261:7 309:11

318:6 347:15

366:6

creates 22:18 24:19

88:8 343:22

creating 105:14

credible 23:5

credit 291:18 346:2

crew 248:3

criteria 55:17,18

97:12

critical 342:21

346:19

critique 148:17

critiquing 138:15

crosses 54:12

crossroad 342:7

Crown 6:8 318:15

361:10 376:14

crude 295:9

crunching 172:20

crux 110:6

cubic 208:3,7,9

cue 9:8 37:10

cuing 11:21

culpa 378:21

cumulative 149:12

309:7,12

curious 106:22

313:6

current 28:15

124:1 239:21

251:13 276:15

304:4 336:9 366:4

currently 23:4

24:13 61:20 62:8

109:3 151:22

265:4 270:21

366:10

curtain 151:10,11

151:15 153:21

154:1 157:19

242:12

curtains 47:10

151:9,19 155:17

156:1,12,20,21

157:3,3,8,13

158:15 159:17

169:22 170:10

241:5,20 242:19

curve 105:9 113:18

115:14 148:20

150:14 153:2

163:10 164:15

169:10,11,13

218:21 221:19

222:2 303:14

curves 105:14,17

130:17 148:14

150:21 151:5

226:8

customer 39:14

180:9 197:2

200:12 228:8,13

customers 19:22

201:4

customized 326:22

327:1

cut 72:9 286:14

288:17 364:8

cutting 38:18

cycle 28:6 92:8,9

137:4 153:1

204:13 207:20

208:7 211:1,19,20

218:9 247:8 248:7

256:3 295:7

297:16 301:18

303:14,15,18,20

cycles 92:6 286:21

Cymbalsky 1:17

56:11,12,12 261:7

307:3,7

C1303 358:19,20

C1303-08 364:7

C1303-09A 364:18

C1363-05 358:12

368:14

C518 316:20

330:13 366:5,6,9

366:18 367:5

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 394

D

D 4:1

daily 82:10 130:21

158:3 160:15,18

207:19,22 213:18

dairy 265:22

Damodaran 249:10

Dan 2:3 6:6 68:15

68:16 94:6,7

101:11,12 102:3

301:7 336:7,8

343:1,3

Dan's 343:17

dark 294:9

darn 226:20

Daryl 1:18 5:21

29:9,10 37:13,14

39:3 40:2 46:13

46:14 58:1 64:9

71:16 73:5 78:14

81:22 91:18,19

116:10 124:15

133:8,9 140:21

141:11 145:6,7

161:19 166:10

194:11,12 214:10

219:2 222:13

223:9 240:19

244:13,13,14

254:2 260:12

273:4,8

data 17:1 27:4,8

30:19,20 31:4,5

33:3,7 103:8

114:20 132:13

145:13,14,14

146:8,13,15

147:18 148:3,9

154:13 155:1,2,9

164:9 165:10

181:2,9,13 190:18

192:8 200:12

202:4,8 204:22

206:1,4,16 211:11

212:21 217:7,10

217:22 218:1

223:2 225:16,18

226:2 227:8

235:12,15,18,21

240:20 243:9

244:10 247:18,21

248:4 264:3,7,9

265:3,16 273:10

276:12 277:6,7

280:2,5,17,19

281:7 282:10,13

284:20 288:21

289:11 292:19

310:9,10,14,16

312:15 337:20

353:3 365:12

371:4,22 374:19

database 377:3,7

377:13

date 35:11 126:4

235:16 356:12

Dave 1:20 258:19

259:10 261:3

262:16 271:10,16

David 2:16 199:22

200:2 221:19

261:3

day 9:9 15:11 32:11

42:1 83:12 115:7

115:7 129:17

133:14 152:4,7

176:22 178:1

212:14 236:6

256:8,22 286:20

301:15 328:2,3

329:20 339:4,11

339:13 363:6

days 12:10 18:9,10

19:3 242:5 380:2

383:6

dead 218:15

deadline 168:7,8

deadlines 167:13

deal 55:8 86:8

233:11 248:22

249:3,20 254:1

348:18

dealer 143:8,14

183:2,5 188:5,12

190:15 195:16

201:5,13

dealers 181:8 184:2

184:2,19 190:14

195:1,11 201:8

dealing 256:14

263:15 328:3

dealt 63:20

debt 249:15

decals 54:22

decide 48:20 60:13

77:3 185:1

decided 49:10

326:8

decides 367:17

deciding 362:4

decision 256:8

322:8

decompose 49:6

dedicated 11:13

15:3 59:7 69:9

71:13 72:21 73:6

74:6 114:10

142:13 190:3

192:5 204:1,5,6

224:3 269:10,12

270:2,3 304:9

deemed 25:15

deep 171:13 174:19

default 128:13

defer 359:12

define 74:20

172:15 321:16

defined 217:1

321:15 322:11

333:18

defining 86:16

349:13

definitely 159:20

241:4 281:14

282:4 374:20

definition 68:17

314:2,13,20 315:2

321:18,19 323:8

349:14 350:3,5,11

350:22 351:7

352:3,12 353:1,5

357:11

defrost 25:22 26:10

94:12 96:14,15

degree 27:5 207:12

degrees 80:8,9

209:14 369:4,6,6

369:7

delivered 59:20

delivery 82:8

delta 81:14 83:22

301:13

demising 83:2

demonstrating

316:6 318:21

demonstration

30:8

Department 1:1

4:7,14,21 6:18,21

8:19 12:2 17:3

18:7,15,22 19:6

19:10 28:6 31:20

33:11 34:9 35:17

36:13 39:16 40:13

41:20,22 42:18

45:4 46:5 47:17

63:12,21 67:7,12

69:14 70:20 85:4

85:17 87:22 97:7

102:12 108:19

109:5,12 115:16

118:5 126:19,19

127:19 144:18

147:2,4 150:9

157:17 159:22

162:19 166:1

167:11,14,17

168:9 172:14

173:4 179:3

193:13 223:14

246:19,21 249:4

253:5 261:13,14

261:16 262:13

263:7 280:11

301:9 312:19

314:9 319:10,15

320:6 321:2

323:18 326:14,16

327:4,5 331:17,22

332:10 339:19

341:1,17 345:19

346:8 354:2,10

355:6,14 356:2,18

363:17,21 366:3

367:8,17 368:19

372:8 377:3,17

378:4 382:10

departments 55:2

335:21

Department's

60:21 171:16

292:15 331:19

depend 60:15

depending 122:2,4

135:14 191:5

212:5 258:9

depends 39:13 56:6

60:1 131:7 228:12

244:21 286:17

301:13

depreciation

139:11

derated 358:18

derive 168:19

199:19

derived 58:10

211:5 259:15

deriving 169:5,13

describe 21:6 92:14

125:1 130:2

174:20 176:1

179:16 363:14,14

363:15

described 57:18

184:3 226:16

311:5

describing 158:3

description 10:1

25:4 78:5 119:19

246:22

descriptive 73:7

118:7

design 40:4,11 41:4

46:12 60:12 80:13

80:15,16,19 81:6

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 395

81:9,10,13 83:18

83:21 84:11

104:21 120:13

121:4 141:2,3

145:16 146:21

149:21 160:21

176:5 184:22

188:4 224:18

315:3 318:11

322:12 343:6,9

designed 43:19

73:1 83:21 114:22

233:3 324:21

325:21 373:6,10

373:12,14,15

designer 216:13,19

324:21

designing 80:22

333:17

desirable 22:7

desk 8:18

detail 32:11 64:14

86:1 104:20

124:18 125:6

145:19 165:19

166:21 167:8

171:13 174:13,22

180:14 185:11

189:7 204:11

234:17 239:21

311:5 331:14

detailed 65:12 67:5

116:3 174:15

203:14 235:17

310:9

details 9:9 96:21

104:8 141:1,21

167:16 168:15,18

169:1,12 173:22

176:11 203:15

233:11 302:21

337:7 350:10

354:12

determination 9:18

determine 114:20

179:19 181:13

185:2 211:14

218:2 341:13

358:7 366:4

determined 58:15

104:11

determines 371:11

determining

326:17

develop 25:15

107:14 138:20

309:19 341:18

349:8

developed 67:9

150:13,14 213:13

250:19 324:5

developing 36:13

37:4,11 171:19

development

271:20

develops 85:4

deviation 344:18

345:17

deviations 345:11

device 22:4

devices 12:13

Devin 2:11 7:18

diagram 234:17

296:12

diagrams 26:13

dialogue 171:20

342:10

differ 352:6

difference 65:19

66:2 132:11

244:22 245:7

341:11 359:21,22

369:9

differences 86:22

262:22 371:13

373:22

different 11:12

21:20 22:3,18

24:5 27:12 35:19

36:20 44:18 59:10

65:9 67:3,13,15

67:21 68:1,21

69:4 73:3 77:20

80:6 82:22 83:3

86:7 92:19 93:21

104:6 109:4,14

111:1 114:8

116:17,21 117:8,9

117:17 119:19

120:15 121:6

135:14 136:11

142:18 145:11

150:11 154:12

155:4 160:10

163:16,18 164:2

166:5,5 171:16

173:22 183:21

188:15,17 189:12

233:12 235:1,14

235:14 236:20

237:1 246:4,8,10

248:3,14 251:4,6

255:8,9,11,12,12

255:13,18 265:13

266:10 267:1,11

273:3 276:16

292:10,13,20,20

295:14 297:8

298:7 302:10

310:7 318:1

334:15 348:11

352:7,8 353:13

354:12 356:19

357:6 360:14

364:9 374:20

382:21

differential 374:15

374:17,18

differentiate 67:3

77:16 90:4

differentiated

75:17

differently 160:13

173:12 299:11

319:19

differing 349:19

350:13 351:5

difficult 250:15

355:18

difficulties 342:8

difficulty 40:1

332:5

dig 31:17 243:1

digital 92:20

digits 273:13

377:11

dilemma 42:17

diminish 153:7

diminished 228:18

dip 161:16

direct 139:10,10,13

139:14 204:14

205:5 206:6 268:8

268:17 269:8

273:6 275:18

279:18

directed 34:9

direction 11:11

107:13

directions 280:14

directly 138:1,2

171:18 182:13

184:19 277:4

278:15

directs 34:21

disadvantage 14:5

363:9

disaggregate

200:13

disagree 275:4

340:21

disagreed 314:14

disagrees 99:18

disclose 147:5,19

disclosed 310:16

disclosing 146:14

disclosure 310:12

381:1 382:6

disconnected 34:15

34:16

discontinue 336:18

discount 240:4,8,16

248:13,15 249:1,5

257:2,9,22 258:1

258:7,14 259:20

297:18 298:6,7

305:15 306:13,15

discounted 298:11

298:13,15,17

307:8 308:2,4

discounting 306:20

307:12,17

discouraged 168:7

discouraging 168:9

discuss 65:10 66:14

91:14,17 116:1

138:19 172:12

174:10 204:11

232:14 322:14

380:16

discussed 38:3

203:18 353:2

discussing 232:9

discussion 9:1 10:8

10:10 11:9,14

16:18 37:17 75:22

76:1 105:16

174:15 177:3

206:3 262:13

313:14,15 372:7

375:11

discussions 4:19

61:11 65:12

171:21 190:19

disjointed 246:3

display 21:5 22:1

26:5 37:21 38:2

47:20 67:14 68:2

75:21 76:1,2,6,9

76:14,20 77:1,3

77:10,19 78:7

79:3 86:4 88:10

88:21 89:2,17

114:9 133:19

204:2 215:5

274:11,22 370:11

372:19

displaying 67:20

distinct 14:5

270:10

distinction 109:22

270:8 352:20

distinguish 352:4

distinguishing

242:8

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 396

distribute 183:15

183:16

distributing 312:3

distribution 112:20

114:2 140:15

180:15,18 182:8

182:16 183:4,10

183:18 187:1,8

189:4,17 191:4,9

193:19 199:18

200:14 214:7

227:16,18 284:15

292:10

distributions 110:6

274:19

distributor 190:1

195:3 196:18,21

197:15

distributors 181:6

183:22 184:9,10

320:4

dive 174:20

divided 28:22

161:4

dividing 211:7

220:15 234:13

divisions 106:7,10

106:11

docket 16:11 147:6

147:10,10

document 35:6,21

66:1 281:9 354:10

354:16,19

documentation

174:3

documented

135:20

documents 46:1,6

85:10 86:1 356:9

DOE 1:17,21,22

23:14 27:19 36:15

36:18 37:4 56:13

67:20 73:16,20

74:4,11,19 77:7

79:21 83:9 85:15

97:19 101:6 104:1

104:4,7,11,16

105:1,3,7 123:1

128:13 130:14

138:1,20 139:11

139:19 140:2,11

156:10,17 158:14

161:4 173:20

176:8 179:19

183:12 184:1,16

189:11,20 190:18

190:19,20,22

191:2 196:10

197:12 198:2,7

203:5,17 204:10

204:22 206:19,20

206:21 208:5,10

208:13,18,20

210:13,15,16

211:1,18 216:10

217:1,1,6,6,21,21

223:20 225:18

235:10 256:15

264:9 266:14

267:12 277:5,14

298:14 302:11

309:6 313:18

314:22 315:8

316:2,7,12 322:7

323:12,12 334:7

335:5 341:12

348:7 349:11,13

350:2,7 352:15

353:10 358:7,10

358:12 359:14

370:8,22 371:4

DOE's 55:17 75:8

158:12 179:22

182:7 183:18

185:6 216:8 237:6

259:19 309:14

381:17

doing 32:19 33:1,2

36:22 55:7 57:14

127:18 128:12

135:6 145:4

150:15 153:2

172:22 214:4

261:10 285:8

307:14 332:11

342:13 358:14

364:11 369:11

dollar 145:10

dollars 230:20

256:19 297:5

305:17

domain 181:2

dominant 230:7

donut 129:7

door 25:3 43:8 47:9

50:16 54:2 56:4

56:19 57:8 62:20

63:17 76:16 78:22

82:10 88:6,15,17

119:4 131:15,20

132:5,10,10 133:3

133:12,18,19,20

151:13,16 157:20

159:5 170:1,3

284:4,5 317:1

318:9 339:10

344:7 363:5 370:8

370:16,21 371:2

371:19,20 372:16

372:21 373:4

374:5,10,21

375:19

doors 14:17,20,21

30:3 40:5 41:14

41:15 44:4 47:6

47:11,22 50:21,21

51:2,3 53:18,18

62:18 67:14,18

76:19 78:5,6,8,13

79:5,7 88:21

156:12,19,21

170:9 215:8,13

242:20,21,21

284:1,3,6 316:21

317:1,11 318:8,12

331:3,4,4,4

340:11 341:7

370:10,11,19

371:6,9,12 372:7

372:12,19 373:9

373:14,16 375:5,6

375:18

doorways 88:13

dot 149:13,13,15

149:18

dots 149:9

double 348:22

doubled 290:9

Doug 4:4 6:4 26:10

86:11,12 274:6

375:15

Douglas 1:10,12

2:12

downloaded 68:20

downstream 36:18

106:3 108:19

145:5 176:2,7

197:18

dozen 52:12 132:17

dozens 158:22

DR 6:13,22 73:12

73:16 74:15,18

98:16 99:3,13,17

99:20 127:22

150:1 166:8

168:13,18 169:3,9

179:13 185:13

186:1,9,12 187:6

187:10,13 188:13

189:10 192:1

194:9,17 195:20

196:9 198:17

199:4,8,11,13

201:22 202:3,9,12

202:18 210:12

213:2,5 216:5

219:1,7,10 221:12

222:16 223:18

225:17 226:9

227:6 232:6

247:15 256:4,13

256:20 280:3

281:2 313:1,6,10

323:11 332:22

dramatic 289:20

304:19

drastically 225:2

draw 21:8

drawing 21:14

84:21

drawings 45:18,21

55:1

drew 217:10,22

drive 117:22

222:18 229:4

driven 48:17 228:8

driving 286:19

drop 220:22 245:12

dropped 224:15

dropping 290:20

dry 90:21 286:14

due 101:21 205:8

238:22 291:18

347:4

duty 137:3 204:12

211:1,19,20 218:9

dynamics 91:10

D.C 1:9

E

E 2:8 4:1,1

earlier 28:4 37:9

53:2 79:14 98:5,5

103:7 114:7

126:17 151:4

184:3 200:10

208:16 226:16

275:16 282:2

283:22 304:17

315:21 317:9

328:2 353:14

early 156:18

172:18,18 328:2

earning 249:17

Earthjustice 1:14

8:6

easier 49:5 145:20

326:11

easily 28:13 301:19

easy 87:12 342:9

EC 91:6

echo 103:6

ECM 102:5,18

economic 232:15

259:16 265:17

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 397

324:12

economically 49:11

economize 92:6

economizer 92:4

98:17 99:4 100:3

economizing 92:8

economy 193:22

201:12

Edison 2:11 5:16

7:19 27:19

EER 21:6 75:12

EERE 12:9

effect 62:1 87:9

94:9,15 95:13

104:17 126:3

127:5 130:18

149:12 164:21

195:22 299:14,20

361:16

effecting 289:21

effective 25:11

35:11,15 46:20

105:8 126:4

151:12 152:1,5

170:6 356:12

effectively 165:21

259:21

effectiveness

151:19 153:8

170:11,13

efficacy 135:4

355:1

efficiencies 224:9

efficiency 1:2 8:3

19:22 24:11 27:13

28:21 36:20 49:10

56:14 57:22 58:10

58:19 63:9,10

64:1,6 85:6 90:4

91:2,8 92:9 94:11

95:1 100:5 101:14

101:16,22 102:16

103:20 105:9,14

105:17 108:7

117:20 118:1

119:13 141:8

148:14,20 153:1

153:21 156:3

158:2 161:2,8

164:18 165:5

176:7,9 180:10

197:7 203:3 224:7

224:22 225:1,1,7

225:8,9 226:19

228:18 229:7

236:19 237:1

238:16 250:18

251:4,7,15 265:2

282:14 302:10,12

304:7,20 305:2,9

334:19 335:10

efficient 34:4 42:8

102:18 104:13,16

112:9 129:13

149:1,6 150:5

158:13 163:18

173:9 228:16

229:1,11 231:7

233:5,22 234:4,7

236:14 237:17

238:17 295:18

296:10 297:1

298:11 299:10,17

299:20 300:9

311:14 335:7,18

efficiently 300:2

EIA 235:12

eight 120:1 154:14

162:5,12 211:2,6

211:6 212:7,16,20

212:22 215:17,19

286:21 287:2

EISA 20:3,12 55:11

57:10 62:17,21

63:11 80:13

104:15 111:5

126:1 128:3,9

134:21 135:4

150:2,6 155:19

156:2,7,9,11,22

157:2,9,18 169:17

170:7 316:22

323:4 354:16,17

381:12

either 34:2 45:7

58:15 72:17 76:11

82:3 95:12 146:18

157:19 161:2

170:12 204:5

278:11,16 284:7

293:2,4 316:8

333:11 338:10

340:19 370:11

373:3

elect 30:13

electric 205:8

electrical 43:17

204:14

electrician 44:6

electricity 20:8

235:6,9,11,20

236:8 255:13

260:4 297:4,5,13

297:15 298:20,22

299:3,4 340:13

element 324:16

elements 42:14

48:19 57:21 90:7

144:16 174:21

325:1

eliminated 97:21

eliminates 97:10

ELIZABETH 1:22

Elliot 364:22

else's 195:2

email 310:22 377:9

378:10,10,17

embedded 237:21

emerged 11:17

Emerson 1:16 7:17

90:3 220:11

emphasize 36:12

103:8 200:4

empirical 132:18

132:20

employment 3:11

10:4

encompass 323:1

encompasses 74:6

encourage 4:18

11:22 15:22 16:21

337:15

ended 119:9 169:11

ends 16:6 54:14

133:4 166:12

383:2

end-use 87:13

end-user 66:3

179:20

energy 1:1,2,2,3,4

2:6 3:6 4:8,14

5:15 6:19,21 8:3

8:19 9:18 14:14

16:16 17:5 19:21

21:3,7 27:1 29:2

31:22 32:3 33:21

36:9 40:13 41:20

43:7 44:1 45:4

48:1 49:9 50:6

51:22 58:9,19

62:13 67:16 79:8

83:8,11,12,19

85:6 87:15 101:3

103:19 105:2,5,10

106:4 107:9 108:6

108:9,20 109:6,12

112:8 114:2

124:14 126:19

130:12,21 131:2

136:5 138:3,9

139:16 144:18

147:2 149:7 151:8

151:14 157:17

158:2,3 159:14,18

160:16,18 161:4

161:14 162:2

166:1 167:11

174:16 176:12

179:22 180:1

181:19,20 202:20

202:21 203:1,6,11

204:14,18,19

205:2,5,13,16,18

206:6,16 208:19

223:22 224:1,14

225:12 226:4

232:19 233:7,19

235:21 236:1

246:19 253:5

255:14 260:5

261:14 263:3,21

264:1 265:5

280:11 286:3

295:16,17,20

296:11,14,16

298:13,16,21

299:2,5 301:9

302:2,5,9,14

303:7,17 304:15

305:4,8,9,14

306:12,20 307:2,4

307:4 317:6

319:10 321:2,6,10

325:16 326:14

327:4 329:3,9

331:20 333:10

339:2,15,19

341:17,19,22

344:11,21 345:4

345:19 347:16

349:22 350:14,15

350:16 351:19

352:5,10,18 354:2

355:6 377:3

Energy's 4:7 63:21

energy-saving

197:9 224:17

enforce 324:2

329:18 335:22

enforceability

62:14

enforceable 63:2

enforced 28:13

62:15 328:11

enforcement 22:11

61:20 71:8 323:18

327:3,6 353:8,20

354:8,12 355:2,9

355:10,13 356:20

357:4

engaging 36:5

engineer 326:7

engineered 45:21

59:9

engineering 3:5

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 398

9:15 36:8,16 66:1

74:11 91:15 97:3

97:5 103:5,16

104:2 106:3 110:3

121:4 128:18

130:3,16,20

138:13 176:1

180:11 200:6,9

203:19 213:12

224:18 225:22

226:2 227:7

305:18 310:10

enjoy 177:19

enormous 291:18

ensure 120:15

entered 25:18

enterprises 186:14

entertain 172:13

entire 29:17 38:18

41:8,17 44:7

46:17 108:21

120:18 125:2

170:2 193:3

339:21 369:8

372:16

entirely 93:21

164:8 234:1,21

entities 315:3

322:12

entity 183:9 246:16

entrants 24:19

entry 253:1

entwined 11:4

envelope 29:15,17

36:14,17,19 46:17

62:22 63:14 67:12

68:8 79:20 81:10

81:14 83:22 86:2

86:9 104:5 107:1

107:6,16,17

115:22 119:6

130:11,20 131:1,9

148:20 149:17,21

154:15 160:5

176:9 185:20

186:22 187:2,16

203:12 204:15

205:5,13 206:2,5

206:6,7 224:12

225:10,13 228:16

228:21 237:8,9

239:18,22 245:6

250:6,12 251:5

267:22 271:3

279:15 287:10,14

315:4 349:14

357:20

envelopes 37:5,12

37:16 67:8 70:5

88:10 89:18 104:2

106:8,16 118:17

119:20 160:13

186:5 191:19

203:18 204:17

250:4 266:8,12

267:2,5,18 268:8

272:4 277:2,10,19

278:3 285:21

286:1,13 349:18

350:12 351:11

352:4

environment 60:6

60:7

environmental

3:11 10:5 296:7

EPACT 354:15

EPCA 314:15

equal 194:6 270:4

303:12,18

equally 190:1

equates 363:5

equation 70:10

79:16 124:21

125:2 211:5 218:2

equations 132:9,20

210:14 211:13

equipment 9:18

16:17 20:21 21:13

25:8 34:4 42:7,13

45:5,12 64:7

66:21 67:3,6,21

68:5,10 69:5 70:5

71:4 73:19 86:2,6

86:7 103:20,22

106:15 109:15

112:6,22 115:21

117:8 118:3

130:15 139:8,16

143:8 179:20

180:7,8 181:21

182:8,21 183:2,5

183:10,13,16,19

184:11 185:1

188:10 189:13,20

190:4 191:17

195:11,16 196:1

197:7,8 199:16

203:2,4,20 216:12

227:21 228:11

233:5,6 235:3

239:19 241:19

244:3,6 247:5,11

250:17 251:21

252:12 253:2

263:4 264:13

265:1 266:4,4,11

267:1,8 272:8

274:9 281:13,17

283:15 285:8,9

292:14 296:21

297:1 299:10,17

299:21 302:13,17

304:4,8 305:13

315:10 325:14

326:19,20,21

339:21 341:8

349:18

Erbs 1:18 5:21,21

29:10,10 37:14,14

39:6 46:14,14

48:12 58:2 59:17

59:21 71:17 72:6

73:8 74:5 78:15

78:18 82:2 91:19

91:19 100:9

116:11 117:11

118:8 124:16

133:9,9,21 140:22

141:12 145:7,7

161:20 162:21

163:22 164:6

165:12 194:12,12

194:21 214:11

219:4,8,11,14

222:14,17 228:6

229:10 240:20

241:22 242:4,15

242:22 244:14,20

254:3 260:13,21

261:2,11,22 262:3

273:5,9,12

erect 50:10

Eric 1:13,18 7:2

8:7 64:21 78:10

79:18 103:4

108:14,16 115:12

120:10 123:17

131:21 134:8

147:17 153:15,20

155:20 159:8

242:17 243:6

292:17 312:2

359:12

Eric's 363:12

ES 37:7

escalation 240:7

258:14 259:21

260:2,4

escalator 177:13

esoteric 171:21

especially 267:13

essentially 21:6

37:21 49:21 62:16

71:6 82:17 182:21

234:5 249:14

295:6 299:3

303:16

establish 322:1

established 330:18

353:7,9

establishes 353:19

establishing 356:4

establishment

266:21

establishments

288:8 289:8

estimate 140:3,4,6

194:18 217:7

235:19 264:14

276:8 277:5

278:13 281:18,21

estimated 139:19

189:11 203:5

266:15

estimates 109:2

145:4 189:16

203:1 267:7

282:15 292:16

estimating 141:7

180:1 235:11

345:4

estimation 266:14

279:14

et 290:21 349:18

375:6

etcetera 33:10

evacuated 246:15

evaluate 25:11

102:9

evaluated 25:1,12

25:19,22 93:16

evaluating 16:15

85:15

evaluations 171:15

evaporator 25:3

26:20 38:1 72:10

72:16 90:9,15

91:3 96:9 119:4

126:13,13 161:11

205:8 206:13

245:21 246:13

events 127:13

289:20

eventually 336:16

336:16 348:3

everybody 8:16

19:13 42:1 80:2

129:11 144:22

174:3 177:5

307:18 320:4

327:10 331:8

364:22 378:22,22

everybody's 172:9

189:6

everyone's 130:5

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 399

evidence 53:21

202:6

exact 131:22

exactly 13:11 16:3

51:9 64:10 68:11

92:15 94:19

107:10 128:5

155:3 157:18

163:15 199:11

216:17 219:7

256:12 279:13

317:16 374:9

examine 202:4

examined 104:17

examining 309:7

example 53:13

56:17 67:11,15

94:21 95:8 120:22

124:22 130:17

141:13 148:13,19

150:10,15 152:13

154:18 164:16

182:6 207:20

212:8 224:2

236:21 241:19

249:15 257:5

260:4 263:20

277:2 280:17

296:6 299:22

312:10,12 333:9

333:11 336:12

351:20 368:19

371:2

examples 105:16

107:21 123:2

165:7

excellent 55:16

56:7 257:19

369:11

excess 95:21,22

exchange 347:6

exchanger 146:5

exchangers 25:17

59:13 98:4

exclude 101:13

exclusive 68:6

excuse 300:1

302:15

execute 354:8

Executive 37:7

exempted 62:10

exercise 49:20 85:8

97:8 202:22

exercises 203:10

exhaustive 68:7

exist 109:2

existed 370:12

existing 20:3 71:3

exists 33:3

expanded 321:18

expect 35:8 275:11

277:12 288:11

expectation 62:11

expected 247:7

289:18,19 319:21

354:19

expecting 245:13

297:10

expensive 123:9

238:19 242:11

249:21

experience 82:5

125:10 160:1

164:20 194:8

228:3 255:9

256:13 275:6,15

326:16 329:17

336:9

experiences 220:8

experiment 114:22

experts 33:4

173:13,14

explain 131:10

132:3 139:7

148:14 160:8

179:18 182:5

188:20 196:16

198:15 210:14

353:18

explained 180:13

226:3

explanation 237:20

explicit 226:17

explore 380:1

exploring 380:10

exponentially

219:17

exposed 80:7

expound 331:13

expressed 13:15

expressing 259:16

expression 121:17

extended 18:9

extension 18:1

extensive 37:10

128:20

extent 51:15 131:5

142:1 168:22

200:8 217:9

286:12 330:11

335:11,15 353:14

exterior 41:5

external 82:8 91:6

204:7

extra 114:4 147:13

234:3 261:10

298:11 302:7

extremely 24:18

eyes 311:15

e-commerce 184:5

190:16 194:14,22

195:7

E283-04 371:10

F

faces 5:2 369:15

facilitate 17:11

174:17

Facilitator 1:10,12

facing 82:7 109:18

364:13

facings 365:2

fact 29:17 46:21

52:2,22 63:6

106:17 157:17

163:3 166:14

175:5 182:12

218:16 220:8

248:3 296:22

326:13 344:13

347:4 374:2

factor 14:4 15:1

54:15 119:22

142:16 216:10

217:2,13 218:19

219:12 221:11,11

238:5,14,20

239:11 252:7

259:4 299:6,19

312:5 362:14,18

363:1 371:6

factors 199:19

221:17 255:20

259:3 298:19

300:11,14 351:15

factory 139:10,14

Fahrenheit 207:12

fail 231:7 286:2,2

failed 328:22

failure 241:11

252:8

fair 52:16

fairly 22:3 29:2

58:8 72:11 153:4

193:17 219:18

235:10 249:7

251:14 281:22

329:10 330:14

345:3

fall 62:5,8 68:10

86:13 114:18

225:1 321:13

347:15 348:8

falls 18:11 25:5

68:9 225:3 330:11

familiar 5:2 129:10

201:5 311:16,17

359:8 366:7

368:17

fan 27:1 28:3,22

29:4 91:2,3,4,9,10

96:9 101:14,22

113:1 119:4

136:19,20 137:5,6

137:10,11,15,17

138:2,3,3 146:4

205:8,15,15

206:13

fans 25:3 90:9,9

101:20

fantastic 127:3

264:3

far 67:7 138:15

159:13 169:3

255:6 266:11

282:6 294:11

340:3 354:9 381:8

farms 265:22

fashion 33:16

fast 28:8

fastening 44:15

fault 326:17

favor 37:15 323:7

fear 30:14

feasible 49:11

97:14 123:7

149:20

features 83:17 89:1

197:9 224:17

350:13 351:5

federal 8:21 30:12

377:19 379:2

381:3

feed 110:2 130:21

184:11 206:4

338:18

feedback 33:6

103:7 190:20

260:17 313:18

314:1 342:11,21

feeds 176:2 337:21

feel 91:20 103:12

142:2 194:19

196:2 357:14

377:7

feeling 337:9

feet 14:3 77:4,5

111:6,8 112:6

207:21 208:3,7,9

279:17

fell 62:2

felt 123:3

Fenestration 371:7

festivities 376:21

fiberglass 41:6

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 400

field 23:11 40:20

42:5 49:18 52:13

55:13 216:11

322:20 323:15

325:21 329:17,20

331:12 345:5,14

346:6

Fifteen 285:12

fifth 44:6

Fifty 77:5

figure 52:17 61:3

64:19 76:11 180:6

180:20 194:20

196:4,17,19 197:3

198:5,5 199:20

208:8 249:16,19

275:2

figured 191:16

figures 196:11,14

197:14,15,16,19

198:18,19 203:6

207:6 208:13

213:3 224:1,5

file 336:14

filed 139:22

final 13:4 35:9 36:3

43:15 45:1 60:22

61:1 82:14 96:5

107:13 125:18

126:6 147:21

180:9 196:5 197:1

202:15 223:11,22

232:2 260:12

292:5 328:21

348:4 375:8 382:3

finalized 34:20

35:14

finally 27:9 105:6

105:15 130:15

140:11 205:11

311:1 318:19

financial 139:21

166:19 295:11

306:13 307:1,8

310:9

financially 249:21

292:2

find 5:8 9:3 11:12

26:13 28:8 32:18

52:7,22 77:14

165:8 197:16

207:3 214:20

229:14 230:8

239:8 244:4,15

251:12,20 254:7

280:13 294:11

295:22 326:17

331:22 332:11

358:15 362:14

375:20

finding 329:17

358:22

findings 31:7

fine 99:14 270:14

330:20 383:7

fingers 367:20

finish 61:16

finished 326:12

finishing 79:11

finite 59:15

fins 90:16,22

firm 270:6

first 20:4 25:2

37:17 66:14 69:16

78:2 86:9 89:5

97:13 105:2 106:7

106:20 113:17

115:14 126:20

128:6 130:9

140:21 148:21

149:14 153:3,6

161:8,9 168:12,17

179:18 180:4,5,17

191:3 196:17,18

197:20 198:5,14

205:1,4 206:18

207:11 211:9

219:4 224:6

226:22 233:14

238:3 239:17

252:9 257:7

258:20,22 261:6

263:3,3 273:19

288:17 308:20

314:6,13,15

321:13 326:2

343:1 355:19

358:5,13 366:2

368:13 376:8

fit 59:19 87:9 125:7

282:22 284:4,7

Fitz 1:18 7:2,2

64:20,21 66:6,12

68:22 69:22 70:16

75:4 77:6 78:11

79:19 83:15 84:2

85:1 88:14,17

89:3,5,20 91:12

91:16 94:19 95:4

95:10 96:20 97:6

99:1,6 100:21

101:7 103:1

108:16,16 115:12

115:12 116:8

120:10,11 122:20

124:3,7,12 131:21

131:21 132:5,15

133:15,22 134:2

134:10,21 135:3

135:13,22 141:20

146:6 147:20

151:18,21 152:10

152:12 153:10,16

154:3,16 155:3,12

155:21 158:11,21

159:3,7 242:18

243:2 359:13

360:13,22 361:7

363:18 365:9

367:4,11 368:18

372:1 373:4,9

five 14:18,20 15:1

104:20 117:18

141:21 145:1,9

150:22 168:20

201:14 218:14

230:6,15,17

231:19 238:8

258:8 277:8,13

284:2 287:15

five-year 231:5

283:8

fix 344:1

fixed 21:6 209:8

373:15

fixtures 122:2

flash 195:5

flat 236:19

fleshed 167:17

flexibility 327:6

350:6,8

float 324:19

floating 126:12

146:3

floor 80:18 88:3

121:21 122:21

154:19 155:1

177:12 368:2

floral 90:20

flow 134:15 204:21

206:16 309:16

357:22 369:8

373:18

flowing 35:20

flows 355:2,7,7

fluorescence

135:15

flying 215:8

foam 51:4 121:13

358:9,19,22 365:3

367:1,22 368:8

369:15,22

focus 8:22 12:12

279:13 347:1

focused 17:15

273:20

folks 23:18 240:11

323:7 332:19

follow 41:20

129:11 166:9

196:17 198:12

259:12 309:11

following 9:4,11,13

9:17,22 53:1

333:12,13 355:21

follow-on 11:22

363:12

follow-up 65:1,16

83:15 92:13 117:5

123:16 241:17

290:17 343:16

379:10

food 31:21 32:7

45:9 60:2 82:8

123:4 143:7

183:13,15,19,20

184:11,14 185:6

190:8,9,13 193:19

195:16 196:1

212:11 218:17

226:10,11 246:1

293:15

foodservice 1:18

5:22 29:11 231:21

foot 59:22 77:4,12

111:22 113:12,20

122:7,8 134:20

135:11,21 229:18

328:13,21 329:19

350:16 360:4

369:1,2

footage 288:15

forecasting 291:13

forecasts 235:22

260:6 290:2

foregoing 294:20

forest 114:18

forgot 179:2

form 235:12,20

293:3 327:13

formal 115:18

167:13 377:19

383:2

formality 168:6,8

formally 147:6

format 24:7 25:9

formats 16:9

forming 33:11

forms 64:1 88:7

formula 341:20

formulate 324:11

formulated 16:4

34:20

Forrestal 1:9

129:11 177:10

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 401

forth 12:1 90:10

380:18

forum 16:17

146:18,19 174:10

forward 15:15 17:4

314:11,22 322:7

338:5 344:15

349:11

found 37:1 49:22

52:2,19 74:11

123:1 139:11

140:6 144:2

145:13 158:14

160:2 161:7 198:3

208:10 299:13

301:12 358:19

four 114:11 116:6

121:22 122:3

203:19,22 208:3,6

209:6 231:5 314:1

373:15

fourth 44:6

fraction 131:19

170:5 281:16

282:1 362:14,16

367:16

fractional 102:5

117:21 182:3

222:19

frame 284:7 363:8

framework 35:5,21

190:21

framing 362:13,15

362:18,22

franchisers 185:1

franchising 254:5

Fred 2:7 5:17 39:18

39:19 43:5 47:1

54:18,19 56:21

78:3 80:10,11

81:6,11,12 83:20

84:9 106:20,21

109:22 110:9

156:15,15 286:16

316:14 323:2

326:1 328:2 359:6

363:3 368:4

369:19 372:9,10

Fred's 318:16

free 103:12 249:11

357:14

freezer 82:18,19,21

83:3 84:16 88:22

180:8 185:19

188:10 208:10

271:8 275:3

300:22

freezers 1:5 4:9,18

14:8,10 15:9

27:16 28:5 34:8

35:1 49:15 65:21

66:11 78:6 85:6

88:12 133:6

150:12 204:1

209:21 274:12

freezing 207:15,17

freight 15:4 133:19

139:2 140:12,15

142:12,21 143:3,6

143:7,13 144:4

French 331:4

frequency 108:22

132:10

Friday 16:6 18:11

front 8:18

frost 90:18 96:17

frozen 207:16

fruit 162:16

fruitful 177:4

fuel 240:8

full 13:1 82:20 90:7

90:9 137:13 139:8

213:16 214:6

225:12 261:16

262:5,14 263:8

302:21

fully 141:5 358:16

358:17

function 238:16

286:15 332:10

functioning 38:13

286:10

functions 246:8,10

fundamental

331:16

fundamentals

327:21 331:9

further 38:15

48:21 69:21 95:7

130:3 160:5

172:15 175:21

176:13 269:17

310:6 320:22

future 62:12 109:5

235:11,18,19

238:7 248:19

264:4 288:3 289:5

289:21 298:10,12

298:14 340:6

353:18 356:21

366:11

G

G 4:1

Gagne 1:19 7:6,6

109:21,21 270:6,7

270:21 271:6

279:11,12 285:17

285:17 290:13,16

290:16 322:3,3,21

338:6,6

gain 100:6 161:2,3

234:12

gaining 194:15

gains 228:16 323:6

gaping 343:21

gas 25:21 27:5

299:2 370:20

gases 95:7

gasket 120:18

373:15 374:2,2

375:17

gasketed 55:4 88:7

gasketing 46:22

89:6 120:22

gaskets 88:6,6

373:6,12,16

gather 291:18

gathering 110:11

173:21

Gavin 2:5 7:10

192:21 232:8,12

271:17 295:3

GC 380:21

gee 339:8

general 6:19

108:17 247:3

293:2 346:13

355:12

generally 72:9 81:5

generated 95:2

151:6

generating 206:1

geometries 121:6

geometry 121:9

132:10

getting 17:4 19:2

49:17 63:13 153:6

168:4 186:22

242:14 247:18

267:9 285:18

286:6 294:16

304:19 317:5

322:4 332:2 339:9

339:9 342:11

356:8

give 18:9 53:13

78:1 113:9 123:20

144:6 148:16

161:20 164:6,9

207:20 255:5

261:5 273:11

274:17 275:1

319:5 321:9

333:14 334:7

339:3 346:2

350:21 351:1

368:14 374:4,20

given 14:21 97:13

111:4 113:22

126:15 233:11

247:21 263:17

276:7 281:17

292:1 297:4 338:5

349:17 370:21

gives 203:15 214:3

228:10 370:16

giving 165:10

245:10 305:3

glad 4:6

glass 40:5 43:8 44:4

47:6,21 50:21

51:2 53:18 57:8

67:14,18 70:7,14

77:4,4,12 78:5,6,8

78:13 79:5 133:19

242:21 316:21,22

317:11 318:7,9

331:5 370:16

372:12 373:9,14

374:10,21 375:5

glazed 79:17

glazings 47:8

globally 193:12

go 4:21 13:2 31:12

34:5 43:19 54:6

59:14 75:21 78:20

79:11 81:12,22

84:16 85:21 88:12

89:16 100:14

101:5,17 106:18

113:20 116:15,17

129:5,12 130:9

140:19 145:21

152:2 159:13

161:17,21 162:10

164:12 174:12,21

177:11,12 185:10

192:18,20 198:11

213:9,9 214:10

219:3 220:5

221:19 222:14

230:20 234:22

235:18 236:21

239:7 241:2

244:13 245:2

247:1 257:6

258:21 260:18

261:9 270:15

278:7 294:11

300:19,22 301:7

307:21 318:8

322:1,7 325:11

326:1 335:8 336:6

339:7 340:1 342:5

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 402

343:2,14 345:22

346:5,6,9,10

356:2 361:9 362:9

370:5 372:9

373:19 382:17,19

goal 350:5 352:16

goes 9:9 45:22 46:5

58:12 59:7 116:19

161:14,15 182:3

187:4,7 189:13

219:17 225:2

231:1,2 251:18

269:8 282:6

284:15,17 326:9

329:9

going 9:2 11:10,20

12:21 18:13 23:19

33:5,19 36:5

38:11,14 42:21

44:13,22 49:2,9

50:18 52:13 55:8

57:11 58:2 60:8

60:14,15,17 61:4

63:5,8 65:10,11

65:13 66:13 69:20

77:17 78:1,19

79:8 82:11 84:5

84:10,13,16,17

85:16,21 102:9

103:4 105:12

107:2 108:7

110:21 113:11,16

113:21 115:22

117:20 120:16,17

121:8,15 122:17

122:18 123:11

125:17 126:5,7,11

126:15 127:19

129:5 130:1,2,7,9

131:10 138:12,19

139:2,4 148:12,13

162:5,8 171:5

176:6,11 179:10

188:5 193:6

194:14 198:22

204:11 212:15

214:15 215:1

218:19 219:2

220:13 221:1

223:14 232:18

233:19 234:16

238:8 240:15

242:4 245:12

246:4,11 248:6

250:1 251:7,11

252:17,18,19

254:17 255:9,17

257:14 258:18

259:12 260:10

263:10 264:3,6,19

267:22 273:15

283:5 284:3 287:3

287:9,20 291:4

294:4,11 295:1,17

296:9,17,22

298:16 300:8,9,18

300:20 301:2,14

303:13 308:12,15

308:17,20 311:1,4

313:14 320:8

329:18,21 335:12

339:3,7 342:1,3,5

342:20 343:1,11

344:10,19,20

345:17,22 346:7

346:10,12 348:3

357:18 363:17

368:4 377:5

381:22

good 4:3 10:19

13:14 19:18 33:13

38:8 43:1 48:5

60:18 62:22 64:20

75:14 87:11

102:22 113:9

116:9 127:16

129:17 132:21

163:20 189:1

191:11 194:10

213:14,22 221:22

223:6,13 227:13

232:11 233:11

237:20 244:12

245:18 248:22

249:3 254:15

260:17 265:7

274:20 280:15

284:20 287:8

294:14,16 312:10

312:11 319:5

323:9,10 329:12

332:21 333:17

337:22 342:11

343:4 362:4

371:16 373:8

374:10 379:21

goods 188:17

Gopal 1:15 73:12

179:12,13 185:8

247:12,15 280:22

Gordon 90:1 92:14

Gosney 132:16

Gotcha 95:4 98:9

Government

309:16

grab 129:7

Graham 2:9 8:13

graph 148:21 154:8

154:11 159:12

160:10,11 161:16

175:21 251:3,16

289:4 302:1 303:2

graphic 189:3

graphs 154:9

grasp 50:15

great 25:20 97:5

201:9 243:3,4,20

247:6 259:1 331:1

349:3

greater 9:9 64:14

137:2 174:13

185:11 237:17

238:22 302:20

303:12

greatest 58:18

302:5 303:7

greatly 314:12

327:17

green 12:18 196:13

196:19 205:10

224:6

green-colored

205:1

GRIM 309:17,19

grocery 80:18

182:9 189:15

190:6,12 265:14

265:21 266:19

groove 120:13

121:7,8

ground 11:17

65:13 129:18

177:11 282:5

group 1:20 4:16

39:5 86:4 173:6

334:3 360:10

grouping 205:2

groupings 154:17

groups 86:7 184:18

187:4

grow 288:8,9,16

growing 235:20

289:1,12 290:8

growth 26:2 264:20

288:3,14,17 289:2

289:5,7,8,13,19

289:21 290:5,7

291:15,16,22

GSD 306:5

guarantee 42:18

guarded 362:19

guess 24:9 27:21,22

41:22 46:14 63:15

70:20 72:6 74:22

86:13 92:7 98:2

98:17,21 100:3

119:17 128:1,11

140:22 141:12

142:4 145:9 150:2

159:5 169:3

174:18 186:21

228:12 240:21

260:1 266:5,16

323:12 327:13

361:3,21 362:10

362:17 367:12

368:2

guesses 266:22

guidance 298:5

307:13

guided 210:17

213:6

guy 44:3 213:9

246:12 364:11

guys 43:2 126:5

162:8 280:18

355:19

Guzman-Leong

1:19 7:20,21

H

H 1:18

half 52:12 151:8,14

152:6,11 159:13

162:2 163:6,7

187:4,7 190:7,8

208:8 240:1 270:1

284:14 294:7

321:13

half-horse 220:18

half-ton 222:4,6

223:4

hand 232:8 287:3

365:15

Handbook 244:1

247:17

handed 179:5

handle 30:7 40:14

40:20

handled 58:13

handout 65:3

hands 195:5

handy 156:7

hand-in-hand

101:17

hang 185:8 308:12

hanging 162:16

happen 125:12

238:13 252:18

289:17 329:21

331:12 333:5

happened 128:2

happening 48:22

174:18 216:11

329:22

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 403

happens 214:13

252:10,15

happier 152:20

happy 125:11

167:3,5 282:17

331:22 333:5

341:18

hard 30:19 153:6

190:18 229:9

232:16 266:5

280:8 283:16

329:21 334:20

382:15

harder 121:15

122:17

HARDI 181:5

202:13

Harmon 2:3 6:1

13:7 15:18 17:14

69:16,16 83:5

98:11 110:20

113:15 119:15

123:20 133:2

142:9 143:1 144:3

153:19 175:3

188:2 191:13

193:15 195:4

198:11 200:22

209:3 212:8 220:5

230:11 252:5

269:5,6 270:7

272:20 274:7

282:2 283:2,3

290:2,3 293:8

311:21 315:21

364:3

Harmon's 116:14

267:10

harping 141:13

HARTMAN 1:20

haulers 15:3

142:13

head 126:12 131:18

144:11 146:3

258:10 269:15

271:19 293:4

headache 117:13

heading 196:18

heads 77:22 223:9

255:5

health 33:18 34:1

46:4 48:6,17

50:11,12 55:2,2

87:15 97:18 300:6

309:9

hear 12:19 16:19

70:21 81:3 89:12

119:18 120:7

166:16 167:2

200:17 212:9

221:6 222:10

247:13 270:12

332:18 359:4

381:17

heard 140:7 170:11

200:10 225:20

342:16 376:17

380:11

hearing 61:12

103:10,15

heat 25:17 46:20

47:5 59:13 94:12

95:2,11,13,21,22

98:4 115:6 133:6

138:4 146:5 175:7

206:10 300:2,3,17

300:19 301:10

358:5,7,10 367:5

369:8 375:11

Heatcraft 2:13

90:13 100:16

111:19 185:18

209:5 213:11

275:6

heated 88:20

heater 88:11

heaters 88:15,17

heating 6:14 94:9

94:14 181:5

299:12 301:11

heats 207:13

209:13

heavily 33:14 340:6

heavy 360:2

held 17:8 231:11

381:19

help 33:11 53:6

65:12 115:19

120:19 165:20

171:4 172:15

243:10 254:11

341:22 347:3

356:7

helpful 18:4 138:18

144:14 170:21

171:4 201:16

210:3,8 223:10

232:1 239:5

248:10 254:20

275:22 281:5

312:10 341:1

361:8 363:17

helping 209:2

helps 341:20

herd 11:10

heretic 291:11

hermetic 112:10

117:21 230:22

231:17,17

hermetics 229:1

230:14 231:6

he'll 343:7

Hi 15:20 37:14

103:3 173:19

200:2

high 28:8 54:21

55:1 60:3 80:15

81:2 90:4 91:2

101:16,21 105:22

130:10 154:1

192:3 194:15

196:2 198:8

201:21 210:22

211:2 212:16

217:16 218:10,12

226:20 251:14

268:6 270:1

273:13 275:17

276:17 287:7,11

305:2 312:8

higher 91:7 101:13

102:16,16 112:15

121:1 141:8 197:7

217:15 220:9

224:22 234:12

236:15 238:21

257:7,9,10 305:9

highest 42:19

108:22 137:5

183:1 225:7,9

251:15,19 303:20

304:20 305:4

highlighted 303:9

highlighting

288:20

highly 326:22

Hill 2:10 5:12

hinge 170:9

hinged 340:11

hinges 157:12

histogram 115:15

historical 27:5

264:10,12 275:3

278:12 293:20

historically 345:6

354:9

history 126:15

162:4,11 327:22

330:2 335:21

hit 177:18

hog 48:1

hold 48:9 231:20

286:11 360:5

holding 209:10

367:19 381:11

holds 369:5

hole 72:9 343:21

home 87:2 336:21

homes 333:3,3

honestly 239:10

hope 68:13 153:5

382:12

Hopefully 96:18

194:3

horsepower 102:6

117:18,19,21

222:15,19,20

230:4,6,17 231:20

268:9

hot 25:21 358:13

359:2 362:19

365:17,18 366:2,7

366:8,14 367:9

368:14

hour 116:19 129:6

216:16,18,21

219:16 220:1

224:15 230:20

294:7

hours 64:19 152:4

152:7 211:2,3,6,7

212:16 214:15

215:8 224:16

328:13,21 329:20

339:4

hour-cycle 208:18

house 49:5 300:1

328:8,10 330:7,8

336:20 337:2,10

housekeeping

179:2

houses 330:1

336:11

housing 49:1

HTP 1:20

huge 26:2 82:12

218:19 344:20

345:17 359:20

humidity 175:9

hundred 77:5

Hussmann 6:6

HVAC 299:9,16

300:14

hybrid 94:16,17

95:15

hypothetical

277:16 338:4

hypothetically

302:11 369:1

H-A-R-D-I 181:5

I

ice 94:15

ID 177:17

idea 51:1 52:1

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 404

55:13,16 77:9

109:17 113:10

120:12 127:4

264:18 284:16

285:13,22 348:7

357:22 358:2

ideally 22:14 28:18

264:3 276:9

337:17 338:1

ideas 43:2 53:3

123:18 376:17

identified 154:15

184:1

identify 22:13

25:13 67:2 96:8

identifying 22:14

ignore 34:1 56:8

167:18

ignoring 18:13

illustration 225:16

illustrative 150:16

252:1 277:1 289:3

imagine 146:8

222:5 251:6 255:8

296:6 299:9

Immediately 9:4

immensely 53:6

impact 3:8,9,10,11

3:12 9:21 10:1,3,4

10:5 13:17 36:10

47:12 83:19 97:17

120:2 166:18

203:7 237:2 295:2

295:5,15 297:20

300:12,16 305:1

308:22 309:1,15

309:17 312:1

324:12

impacted 112:7

impacts 36:9

232:22 295:12,12

303:6 309:5

310:20

impermeable 370:1

implementation

356:7

implemented

149:17,22 181:21

224:19

implementing

356:17

implication 263:19

implications 77:1

106:2 188:22

232:19 250:20

263:8 315:6

320:18 332:16

349:10

implicit 222:1

implies 164:15

197:4

imploding 291:20

imply 304:6

import 314:17

important 9:7

13:20 16:9 20:7

23:3 25:12 75:16

76:2,4 79:6 93:16

106:6 116:2

144:20 153:17

184:17,21 197:11

235:8 237:4

248:13 251:2

311:11 345:20

importantly 299:7

impose 330:13

imposing 320:14

impossible 50:13

52:22

impression 174:1

182:7 183:18

185:6

improve 85:5 92:9

103:11 119:13

120:19

improved 90:15

104:17 119:18

120:6,11 121:20

122:21 123:18

130:18

improvement

138:4

improvements 71:8

improves 175:11

improving 224:9

228:17

inches 121:22

122:1,4,22 123:3

include 46:22

68:18,18 74:9

88:5 101:20 163:2

186:4 237:11

239:7 323:6

included 28:2 91:4

98:8 140:12

158:15,20 159:3

186:3 187:18

200:9 229:3 296:8

321:19

includes 27:21 74:8

including 102:8

266:3

incorporate 76:14

81:7 101:3 137:21

358:2

incorporated 44:19

376:18

incorporates 75:9

incorporating

23:17 103:20

incorrect 14:14

142:8 377:9

increase 26:22 63:8

94:10 101:15,21

160:22 161:1

164:20 165:5

245:15 296:22,22

increased 161:11

164:17

increases 26:21

304:20

increasing 81:20

90:17 95:1 245:15

incredible 345:13

increment 165:16

incremental 105:6

181:15,18 182:5

196:15 197:10

344:11

increments 219:19

220:2,14,17 222:4

222:6,12,15,20,22

223:4

incurred 181:22

Independence 1:9

independent 52:10

182:18 183:9

234:21

indicating 177:13

315:15

indirect 139:16

individual 22:20

47:19 58:21 59:1

119:21 121:3

143:13 271:3,4,7

271:21 273:17

358:3 370:21

individuals 12:2

43:12 308:9

indoor 24:2 64:5,6

72:22 79:21 81:2

83:1 114:15 204:5

273:20 304:9

indoors 80:16 84:7

244:21 273:6

Industries 2:7

industry 24:18

30:10 31:14 33:5

35:16 38:11 42:20

84:14 85:9 87:3

109:18 124:10

127:14 128:7

134:5 140:5

143:20 148:5

164:2 173:5

231:21 247:5

249:8 279:22

288:4 289:6

290:19 309:8,10

309:15 320:5,10

320:15,18 324:12

324:16,19 327:16

332:16,19 340:8

342:2,2,8,17

346:11 347:3

361:5,5,15 379:8

industry's 332:12

infiltrate 370:14

infiltrating 329:14

infiltration 25:6

47:10 50:12,15

63:16 88:8 120:20

121:10 124:2,13

131:14,15,20

132:6 133:11

151:4,13,15 157:5

157:20 158:9

159:5 169:20

170:1,3,14 225:21

329:8 344:8

370:19 371:8

372:21 373:10

375:17

infinitesimal

375:18

inform 379:7

information 4:20

17:1 23:5 31:1,10

43:3 51:17 68:21

107:14,15 110:11

115:17 126:21

127:17 139:21

140:1 144:19

145:17 146:7,11

146:17 147:4,8,9

147:14 148:7

165:20 166:4,19

171:3,12 223:13

236:1 240:16

242:20 244:1,4

247:4 249:9,11

264:10,12 265:7

266:1,5 276:10

278:12 280:13

282:13,18 286:12

294:17 295:7

297:15,17 310:9

319:5 334:8 342:9

354:11 363:21

377:9,11 379:1

informative 382:10

informed 337:8

Ingersoll 2:3

Ingersoll-Rand 6:7

initial 233:18

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 405

307:21 361:22

initially 73:16

234:12

inject 121:12

innovation 38:20

innovative 22:19

input 85:11 111:3

134:6 169:4

187:15 248:13

267:12 278:11

318:11 346:13

370:15

inputs 65:14

105:13 138:14,20

138:22 139:3

234:22 251:13

297:7 299:6

309:19 311:10,11

339:1

ins 214:19 265:5

266:19 295:19

299:18

inside 51:5,20 72:3

72:18 81:7,15

82:4,9,11,19 83:9

132:11 205:7

206:12 245:6

368:7

insignificant

360:11 361:18

363:7

inspect 50:3,8

51:14 53:10

334:17,17 337:1

inspected 52:12

53:15 62:6,13

inspecting 53:11

56:8

inspection 50:2

55:5 56:5

inspections 46:9

inspector 45:8 50:7

50:22 53:16,18

335:3 336:16

inspectors 48:7

50:11 337:9

install 49:22

installation 42:15

53:9 61:1 235:2

243:21 244:1,7,10

247:18 284:18

285:9,10 329:12

364:14

installations 51:8

52:4 248:3

installed 44:5

51:12 84:5 246:2

263:17 265:4

266:9 270:21,22

277:11 329:15

installer 323:4

343:7,21

installers 320:3

installing 235:3

installs 43:22

instance 77:2 82:18

90:20 106:4

330:14 352:7

Institute 6:15

instructive 165:6

insulated 67:16

316:20

insulation 41:6

56:18,22 86:13

88:3,4 121:21

122:22 154:19

300:17 380:19

insurance 139:17

integral 38:3

integrated 74:3

87:1 184:10 226:6

integrating 94:13

integration 37:20

87:18 93:14

integrators 187:16

intend 75:2

intended 78:12

intent 352:12

interact 299:10

interaction 63:22

173:5

interactions 299:9

299:16 300:14

interactive 17:6

interconnected

246:14

interest 13:9 61:7

172:8 249:17

interested 61:12

85:13 103:10

124:20 174:19

188:7 252:10

254:13 269:16

286:5 292:12

314:19 315:14

320:6 322:6 358:9

359:1 361:13,14

interesting 15:11

33:20 49:19 86:14

87:8 228:15

interests 60:21

interface 89:7

119:17 120:7,11

120:18 121:3

123:19 124:5

interfin 90:16

interlock 120:14

intermediaries

182:17,22 186:20

intermediary 183:4

International

181:7 333:10

internet 68:20

195:10

interpret 260:16

320:22 351:5

interpretation

35:19

interview 173:21

310:20

interviewing 334:4

interviews 309:18

310:3,6,11,18

312:15,19 313:2

346:11,11 380:6,6

intricate 121:14

introduce 15:13

introductions 3:2

5:5

inventory 82:10

285:6

Investor 19:20

invitation 312:18

invite 381:13

inviting 191:2

involved 45:6

46:11 58:3 171:18

180:20 199:14

225:22 259:13

326:18 327:12

332:3

involves 368:16

isolate 20:17

issue 21:11 23:21

26:8 31:21,22

35:8 55:9 57:12

63:15,16 72:20

86:18 87:16,18

114:6 115:21

116:2,15 191:5,7

213:6 216:7

217:17 243:21

314:4,8 322:7

340:2 358:5 364:5

issues 9:7 10:15,15

10:16 11:3,4 12:3

17:20 18:6 26:16

33:19 34:1 35:17

45:13 50:12 54:11

61:13 62:15 64:11

84:17 124:12

172:11 173:10,11

191:3 218:18

225:21 239:1

259:16 263:5

313:16,19 314:1

338:5 343:22

346:17 347:10

348:15,19 376:10

379:17,22 380:17

380:19,22 381:7

382:21

item 37:3 119:12

287:22 326:6

items 119:11,16,19

287:9 316:13

iteration 327:2

it'll 313:15 373:21

J

J 2:2 303:13

jacks 286:22

JAKE 2:14

January 35:1,6,10

35:13 55:9 62:1

Jim 2:10 6:8 81:4

88:1,2 110:19,22

123:15,17 144:1,2

154:5 318:14,15

322:4,17 338:17

343:14 361:9,10

367:19 376:13,14

Joanna 2:4 6:16

17:21,22 70:3,4

79:13 158:5,6,18

306:2,3 307:20,21

341:2,3 348:5,6

job 30:2 33:14 48:7

48:8 56:7 60:18

143:16 145:19

201:10,13 311:19

323:5 330:20

346:5,9

jobs 201:14

John 1:17 56:11,12

89:15 96:5 226:14

229:14 261:5

joined 271:9

joints 55:3,4,5

Jon 2:6 5:14 19:19

30:18 61:16,18

71:1,17,18 79:10

80:4 82:1,14

89:14 98:1 102:2

125:21 128:2

134:18 136:17

155:15 170:19

174:5 218:5

239:15 245:9

257:13 259:12

270:11,11 271:1

282:9 303:10

333:22 353:16,17

374:22 381:8

Jon's 80:21

judge 339:15

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 406

jump 100:9

jumping 366:14

June 174:7 380:3

jurisdiction 48:14

justification 352:3

K

Karim 1:13 6:13

74:17,18 75:13

98:15,16 127:21

127:22 150:1

168:12,14 256:4

280:1,3 313:4

323:10,11 332:21

332:22

Kason 2:7

keep 11:9 12:12

23:8 29:11 32:5

48:10 117:16

141:13 164:22

223:14 260:10

270:8 322:13

keeping 127:13

keeps 22:21

Kenny 2:8 159:10

287:5 368:11

Kenny's 376:1

key 65:13 67:2,9

85:11 179:17

212:2 234:18

263:19 297:7

kicks 283:11

Kido 1:21 381:22

382:3

kilowatt 152:3,7

224:14,16 328:13

328:21 339:4

kilowatts 329:19

kind 15:17 20:16

25:5 39:12 45:6

51:4 54:14 63:17

64:9 70:9,10,12

71:3 87:7 97:17

109:17 119:8

148:9 153:1

157:20 169:4

171:20 173:16

182:20 183:14,14

186:14 188:15

190:22 193:22

198:1 205:2

207:14 246:2

247:10 253:8

264:15 291:12,19

305:20 320:13

323:8 324:13

325:15 330:13

331:8 333:14

334:14 336:19

337:10 338:19

341:10,14 346:8

348:9 353:20

355:16 357:22

359:15 368:20

380:6,13

kinds 183:21

281:12 331:4

Kirilov 1:21 6:10

6:10 365:22,22

366:18,21 367:7

367:14 368:1

kitchen 80:17

knew 52:18,20

266:20

know 19:5 20:2,10

22:10 23:6 31:16

33:3 34:14 37:16

38:14 44:20,21

48:15 50:18 51:4

51:6,9,11 55:3,6

56:15 68:19 83:9

84:4,5,6,10,13,15

85:19 90:13 91:22

92:1 96:12 98:22

109:10 114:1

115:10 116:16

117:15 123:19

124:1 127:8

131:17 132:14

135:10 140:9

145:9 153:13

162:3 163:8 169:5

175:11 180:10

191:20 192:2

195:14 196:12

201:3,6,8,12

213:18 214:2,13

214:14 215:6

218:16 219:16,19

220:1 221:13

222:8,21 226:21

226:22 227:14

229:17 231:16

238:13 241:8,8

245:1 252:7,19

254:7,11,13

259:12 263:20,22

263:22 265:18

269:1 271:18

273:15 274:1,21

276:6 280:8 283:9

283:14,18 284:12

285:7,14 286:10

290:5,7,10,21

291:10 292:20

296:13,14,19

318:12 335:9

340:3 341:6

353:12 355:17

360:16 364:10

365:7 366:8 370:3

371:18 377:20

knowing 51:19

knowledge 318:12

376:20

known 207:4,5

358:13 367:1

knows 52:3 174:3

241:6

Kohl 1:22 6:18,18

173:18,19,20

262:9,12 357:1,1

Kouski 1:22 7:14

7:14

Krupa 2:2 6:12,12

Kysor 2:7 5:17

83:16

Kysor's 284:6

L

L 1:16 2:7

Lab 7:11 8:12,14

73:13 179:15

192:22 247:16

label 53:7,13,17

54:3 55:9,10,17

55:19,21 56:3,9

57:10 317:2

337:20

labeled 46:7 55:14

148:22 149:19

labeling 43:14

55:15 57:4,20

375:3,4

labels 50:20 51:3,3

56:5 57:14 114:18

337:19

labor 139:10,14

146:21 245:8

Laboratory 1:14

1:15,17,20 2:6,9

2:16,17 7:22 8:8

8:10 200:3 232:13

243:7

lack 289:21

lacks 168:22

ladder 51:13

laid 132:7

land 19:8

landed 143:16

language 29:20

352:17

large 14:6 15:4

26:3 29:2 79:4

106:9 111:1,11

113:10,13 114:5

116:16 118:2

132:1 163:7

164:21 182:9,12

186:14 189:21

190:14 203:21

205:16 208:9,12

209:7 227:1

247:22 276:21

286:20 293:13

304:9 329:10

336:2 345:10

374:1

largely 58:5 291:18

larger 39:5 45:19

92:3 112:7,21,22

124:22 125:4,12

141:14,17 142:13

161:11 165:14

226:17 332:5

351:12 361:2

largest 24:11 27:13

28:10

late 19:3 49:13

354:21

Laughter 108:13

117:14 118:10

120:9 134:1

192:17 226:13

262:10

layer 76:13

laying 142:5

layout 60:15

LCC 234:21 250:5

256:8 258:8

lead 276:9

leads 76:17 79:13

82:16

leak 374:3

leakage 50:18 54:1

238:10 239:8

243:10 371:11

374:11,14

leaks 374:4

learn 54:8 333:19

learned 31:13

209:4

leave 12:20 19:15

19:16 177:9

290:21 318:13

leaves 340:11

343:21

leaving 162:22

363:5

LED 12:18 26:4

89:17 135:18

LEDs 26:1,2

leeway 333:14

left 103:5 130:1

134:13 136:8

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 407

149:14,15 161:22

170:15 182:10

199:3 206:1 297:2

legal 324:6 381:5

legend 136:12

Legett 2:2 7:4,4

69:1 75:6,7 91:14

92:13 93:3 97:2

99:8,9,15,18

102:15 103:3,4

107:7,19 108:5,8

108:14 111:12,15

117:5 118:13

122:19 128:19

130:5 131:16

136:4,13,16,21

137:16 138:7,11

141:18 142:1,17

143:18 144:6,12

148:1 150:4,17,20

156:6 157:1,7

158:10 160:4

163:12 164:5,11

165:11 168:16,21

169:7,14 171:6

175:20 227:9,10

227:20 230:12

308:14 312:9,21

313:3,13 317:3

319:1 336:5

337:13 338:9,15

338:21 339:6,14

340:17 347:18

348:1,16,20 349:9

350:20 351:3,8,10

352:2 357:14,18

359:11 364:17

365:14 366:16,19

370:7 372:14,18

372:22 373:3

376:6

Legett's 130:2

legislation 262:2

263:2

letter 25:19

let's 13:5 32:13

64:15 86:8 89:12

106:18 117:18

125:18 128:22

129:1 141:7

175:19 177:1

178:22 196:17

207:20 208:3

217:15 218:5

221:6 222:10

224:15 225:2

247:12 270:11

276:3 294:10

311:12 319:7

322:13 332:12,18

336:9 348:18,22

350:21 369:1,6

370:5

level 23:10 28:14

42:19 47:14,16

48:2 49:10 51:22

54:14 57:22 63:18

78:20 105:22

116:21 124:21

130:10 136:14

141:5 145:14

156:4 167:21

168:4 171:21

176:7 183:1

201:13 225:9,9

236:19 251:15

253:2 276:17

302:10,13 304:7

305:3,6 316:19

321:9 330:5

335:10 342:15

380:7 382:5,6

levels 36:21 48:14

56:19,22 78:21

79:6 103:20 158:3

161:9 176:9

180:10 203:2

225:1 237:1

250:18 251:4,7

265:2 304:21

331:16

Lewis 2:3 6:1,1

13:7,7 66:4,7

69:17 70:1 83:6

98:13 113:16

115:3 116:5

119:16 121:11

133:3 142:10

143:2 153:20

175:4 188:3

191:14 192:2,13

193:5,16 195:7

198:12 199:1,6,9

199:12,21 201:2

201:17,20 209:4

209:17,20 210:1

212:9 220:7 221:3

230:13 231:15

245:20 246:9

252:6 253:10,15

269:6,20 274:6,21

275:14 283:3

284:11 290:3,14

291:1 293:9,19

311:22 364:5,22

375:15

liability 26:16

liable 30:12

lies 332:6

life 28:6 153:1

239:18,18 241:7

256:2 287:14

295:6 297:15

301:17 303:14,15

303:17,20

lifetime 233:18

234:6 237:9,13

250:4,6,11 277:21

278:14 286:7

339:21

lifetimes 250:1,14

278:15

life-cycle 3:7 9:19

36:9 232:20 233:1

233:15 234:4,20

243:14 248:16

250:16 251:10,19

254:15 256:6,16

263:8 298:8

lift 286:19

light 177:16 212:20

322:5

LightFair 26:1

lighting 26:2,4,4

40:5 41:15 44:5

57:11,14 134:20

135:14 317:11

lights 135:18

likes 18:16 263:7

limit 57:1 325:10

limitation 359:9

line 35:4 44:13

64:10 184:9

217:22 218:1

224:6,6 225:10

246:15 268:16

275:5 289:6,12

305:11 321:3

323:1 326:21

lined 111:6

lines 48:22 243:8

link 210:8

linked 211:13

Liquid 25:17 98:4

list 63:1 85:5,17

87:19 89:10 91:20

98:3,5 99:15

118:17 150:19

157:21 343:8

376:22

listed 86:10 125:19

155:17 156:3

listening 167:22

327:18

lists 52:14 379:6

literally 259:2

literature 74:11

85:8 206:22 207:2

208:6

little 12:18 30:19

30:19 32:15 35:19

44:12 114:16

123:3 128:1

148:14 151:7

152:19 166:4,21

172:10 173:7

193:4 209:7

219:15 259:12

264:16 266:5

273:18,22 288:2

289:3 295:6,9

296:1,12 300:3

304:17 305:6

324:4 327:2 330:7

330:8,10 353:18

355:18 377:4,21

382:13,18

live 118:9

lived 250:9

living 290:4

LLC 2:8,13

Llenza 4:11,13

6:20,20 15:13,19

15:20 18:7 32:14

40:12,13,17 41:19

41:20 45:3,3 61:7

95:18,19 102:11

102:11 109:11,12

110:13,14 126:18

126:18 127:10

144:17,17 147:1,2

150:8,9,18 154:10

155:5 157:16,16

165:22 166:1

167:10,11 172:7,8

246:18,19 247:9

253:4,4,11,18,22

256:17,18 261:13

261:14,18 262:1,4

280:10,11 281:6

301:8,8 307:12,16

319:9,10 321:1,2

321:15,21 323:16

325:3,7,9 326:13

326:14 331:17

339:18,18 341:16

341:17 345:18,19

349:2,2 354:1,2

355:5,6 356:13,15

377:2,2,15 378:4

378:11,13 379:13

382:7,8

Llenza's 53:2

load 47:13 84:11,11

115:6 131:13,19

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 408

131:20 133:4,6

134:20 137:13,13

137:14 138:5

151:14 152:6

170:3 175:8 206:5

206:8,9,10,19

207:1,3,10 208:14

208:14,16,17,22

209:9 210:22

211:1,3,3,4,8,10

212:16 214:21

216:14 218:10,11

218:12 300:21,22

loaded 157:12,19

loading 204:10,12

207:4,18,19

208:11

loads 44:16,17,17

206:8 229:4

local 30:1 48:6,13

50:1,2

located 80:14

260:20

location 44:21

79:22 80:16 82:17

344:9

locations 99:11

locked 177:8

long 60:16 63:3

122:8 156:18

163:1 237:8 241:6

302:7 313:16

327:22 330:2,22

345:1 362:19

364:12 382:16

longer 228:11

250:9 252:15

254:11 287:4

363:6

long-term 214:17

364:6,8 365:5

look 20:20 21:3

22:12 23:13 28:17

28:19 30:16 39:12

46:17 48:19 50:14

51:10 55:3,3

59:21 79:15 83:10

92:1,10 96:21

112:15 117:18

118:4 127:4

142:12 144:22

159:6,12 160:14

162:3,10 164:14

164:17 165:7

169:1,17 195:2

198:8,8,9 209:1

209:13 210:20

215:4 218:7

231:18 236:4,6,9

236:20 246:6

249:14 252:15,16

252:17,22 253:2

254:8,22 255:18

263:7 264:20

265:4,17 276:15

278:6 279:20

286:7 295:16,19

296:12,20 301:4,9

303:3 320:20

333:2 335:20

339:8 344:16

351:12 361:4

377:16

looked 26:12 27:14

47:13 90:16 91:5

91:22 96:12 112:8

151:5 152:16

207:6 229:17

280:19 281:3

284:8 308:1

looking 26:3,6

27:10,12 47:17

49:16 51:9 54:10

62:17,18,19 71:11

87:19 91:10 94:3

96:17 102:5

106:22 111:3

126:11 136:20

163:10 212:12

223:2 233:14,20

245:14 253:1

258:16 269:17

272:10 282:19

286:4 288:14

292:17 295:11

298:21 304:6,14

305:2,12,13,21

323:17 329:6

333:2 337:16

363:12 379:18

381:11

looks 28:21 29:1

66:18 160:10

253:12 258:19

273:22 329:19

330:7 362:13

loose 55:3

Loren 2:11 5:19

lose 229:6

loss 46:21 47:5

lost 323:6

lot 5:2 13:1 18:19

19:9 21:11 26:16

38:7,9 48:18 60:4

64:11 65:10 74:19

82:6 86:1 87:3

122:12 124:4,18

125:6 129:18

143:2 145:5 148:5

152:20 162:16,22

163:14 167:7

171:12,13 172:20

194:22 212:13

214:14 215:14,15

218:15,17 223:13

237:20,21 253:8

254:9 273:14,17

279:16 287:4

294:16 314:8,9

315:13 330:19

331:5,7 333:19

345:6 347:8

348:10 375:19

378:18 382:11

lots 141:20,21

275:19 365:9

love 14:18 134:6,6

242:19 278:11

low 118:8 162:16

198:9 210:22

211:3 222:2 273:6

273:22

lower 15:8 165:16

175:16,17 216:11

234:12 249:22

253:9

lowest 137:6

251:18 252:12

253:1 273:21

lumens 135:1,5

lump 143:12

lunch 9:21 125:16

129:6 176:18

177:1,19

lunchtime 215:7

M

machine 294:12

macroeconomics

291:12

magnitude 279:14

282:5 344:5,17

main 33:21 66:16

85:7

maintain 18:16

81:15 228:11

247:5,11 377:3

maintaining

236:21 300:7

maintenance 236:9

236:18 237:3,16

238:2,3,21 240:22

241:14 242:9

243:15 246:22

248:7,8 263:5

329:12

major 193:20

314:1,8 347:1

maker 94:15

making 33:1 127:5

254:20 294:14

320:6 331:11

334:21 362:21

378:8

manage 29:15

managed 47:15

Management 298:4

Manitowoc 1:18

5:22 29:10 284:5

manner 51:12

Manole 2:3 6:6,6

68:16,16 94:7,7

94:21 95:5,12

96:3 101:12,12

300:15 336:8,8

337:5 343:3,3

manufacture 41:14

195:13 314:16,16

315:2 336:10

360:1

manufactured

122:16

manufacturer 3:9

14:1 22:14 36:8

38:5 40:2,22 43:9

43:10,11 45:2

47:2,15 51:17

55:17 57:4 68:2

77:22 97:16

100:18 101:4

105:11 119:22

120:2 138:21,22

139:1,4,9,12,19

139:20 140:4,14

140:20 142:19,20

146:7 153:22

160:15,17 161:1

166:18 172:4

173:21 184:20

185:3,21,21

188:10 270:12

308:22 309:1,7

310:19 312:1

314:2,14,21 315:9

315:14,19 316:5

316:16 317:21

318:9 321:20

326:4 338:10

346:10 352:13

362:11 367:15

380:5

manufacturers

13:18 14:6 22:18

24:6 29:19 30:22

38:7,9 57:1,8 63:7

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 409

66:18 76:4 84:3

85:13 113:9 115:7

122:1 123:2

140:12 146:9,12

146:14,16 154:1

160:1 162:15

167:4 172:3,5

174:8 182:14

185:20 186:2,3,4

186:7,8,13,18

187:2,3,5,16

190:20 192:7

206:22 208:6

223:8 248:8

266:17 272:18

274:9 279:16

281:17 282:21

309:6,18 310:4,7

310:13,15 312:6

312:12 315:17

317:1 319:21

320:3 324:9

335:15 350:6

352:18 353:3

358:1,14 359:19

363:8,19 365:12

371:2,3,19,20

372:3 376:15

manufacturer's

13:10 22:13 28:14

65:22 66:4 85:10

103:18 145:13,18

180:12 196:22

310:16 315:20

manufactures

41:11,12,15 84:14

manufacturing

10:1 122:6,14

map 180:18

Marantan 2:4 6:22

6:22 166:8,8

March 13:16 120:4

364:6 375:16

376:1

marginal 236:6

245:14

mark 336:15,15

337:10

marked 147:4,11

200:10

market 3:4 9:13

22:16,19 23:5

24:20 36:6,15

59:20 64:16 66:13

66:14,18 85:2

104:5,14 109:20

112:2 158:13

181:18 185:6

186:15 189:12,22

190:4,7,12,15

191:1,5 216:16

217:5,19 218:4

223:21 253:12

264:20 267:1

268:11 272:11,14

276:7 281:19

286:10 288:6,9,18

288:22 289:12,18

289:22 290:10,19

292:22 335:8

marketing 85:10

marketplace 15:9

65:20 67:4 101:5

230:9 231:18

253:1 335:6

markets 288:7

marks 111:2

markup 3:6 13:10

13:12 139:15,19

139:20 142:20

179:21 180:5,16

180:21 181:16,18

182:2,3,5 196:11

196:13,15,20,22

197:17 198:6,14

201:5 202:16

markups 9:17 15:7

36:9 139:1 140:3

148:2,2 181:13,14

181:15,16 200:5

200:19 202:16

235:5

Master 159:10

Master-Bilt 2:8

match 14:9,10

58:15 71:7 115:6

116:5 210:13,15

211:16

matchable 59:16

59:17

matched 13:11

38:22 176:12

203:13 208:15

251:6

matching 51:20,21

115:21 212:6

216:8 217:3 223:5

material 139:10,13

materials 19:14

139:16 154:20

349:20

MaterialScience

2:8

math 198:13

219:20 330:17

matter 10:15 17:20

34:4 53:11 108:2

177:22 218:17

294:20 301:14

matters 177:6

299:20

mature 288:6,7

Mauer 2:4 6:16,16

17:22,22 19:4

70:4,4 158:6,6,18

158:18 159:4

306:3,3 307:22

341:3,3 348:6,6

348:12

max 149:19 220:21

225:5 251:9

maximum 149:20

251:14 302:12

303:14,17 304:7

304:16 305:6

327:6 328:14

McCORMICK 2:5

7:10,10 192:21,22

193:7 232:9,11,12

239:20 240:13

241:16 242:2,6,16

243:17,20 244:19

245:17 248:12

252:2 253:21

254:19 256:10

257:1,16,19 258:6

258:18 259:1

260:3,8 261:17

262:5 263:11

267:19 268:3

269:4,14 272:2

276:5 278:10

279:6 280:20

281:4 287:22

292:8 293:22

295:3,4 301:3,17

303:19 304:1

306:8,16,19

307:10,15 308:7

McHUGH 2:6,6

5:14,14,14 19:18

19:19 61:18,18

71:2,11,21 73:20

79:12 80:4,5

82:16 89:15,15

96:7 98:2,8 102:3

119:3 125:22

127:9 134:19

135:1,9,19 136:1

136:18 137:9,22

155:16 156:1

157:5 170:20

171:9,11 174:5,5

174:14 175:1

218:7 226:14,15

227:17 228:2

229:16 239:4,16

240:3,18 245:10

257:14,17 258:5

258:12 259:9

260:1 270:13,19

271:2 282:12

303:10,11,22

306:11,22 334:1

353:17 354:22

375:1 381:9

mea 378:21

meal 214:20,22

meals 212:14

mean 49:2 55:7

56:22 58:3 60:5

72:7 88:18 92:15

92:16 95:21 96:14

99:1,3 100:17

112:5,6 114:21

123:9 133:10

145:7,10 159:16

164:1,14 165:13

167:15 184:20

188:20 193:5

194:19 197:5,6,11

202:3 205:21

206:20 208:15

214:12,16 218:9

219:18,20 222:14

225:11,20 228:6,8

244:16,20 246:9

248:17 257:5

260:16 267:21

271:6 277:18,22

285:5 307:3 313:7

325:18 329:7

334:4 338:1,7

344:21 346:6

348:1 350:2

361:17 363:4

365:15,18,19

373:9 374:9

meaning 156:12

means 68:7 102:16

104:22 129:3,7

146:11 169:21,22

170:6 196:20,21

197:22 232:20

243:22 247:17

296:2 305:9

314:16 320:22

349:17 350:11,12

meant 108:21

271:6

measurable 124:2

measure 25:12,14

26:22 27:1,13

58:9 83:10 87:12

102:8 151:10,12

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 410

152:4 346:2 367:5

374:4

measured 364:15

measurement

365:1

measures 24:11,12

25:1,11 27:12

28:10 29:3 32:4

48:22 62:22 63:1

63:4,14 79:3

171:15 181:20

227:2 329:13

344:12 352:14

353:11 369:7

measuring 358:8

mechanic 230:20

mechanical 30:1,5

56:20 92:20 183:3

183:5,8 241:1

246:11 286:1,15

mechanism 58:14

median 224:22

medium 106:9

111:1,4,9 114:15

116:20 149:2,3,6

150:10 203:21

208:9,12 224:3,4

304:8 332:1 333:5

341:18

meet 53:19 55:18

56:16 104:14

317:2 325:1

327:12 333:11

meeting 1:6,8 4:7

4:17 5:3 10:18

12:9 13:16 16:13

17:8,9 20:14 43:4

57:5 68:21 120:4

144:20 166:3

171:17 173:15

174:7,9 190:21

310:5 314:19

320:9 325:15

346:14 359:14

364:6 372:5

375:16 376:12

378:1,14 379:19

379:20 380:13,16

381:4 382:9

meetings 11:19

17:11 42:22 43:13

171:11 174:2,2

378:3 379:11

meets 46:2,7 47:4

318:10 323:14

335:9

members 181:10

358:6,11 360:3,7

361:17 366:6,22

367:17 375:12

memory 162:6

mention 64:3

136:22 166:9

mentioned 28:4

43:13 101:16

114:7 119:3 120:1

275:15 283:22

285:18 292:18

316:4 361:11

381:10

merchandise 67:20

met 55:11 321:11

327:8 339:22

metal 141:16 163:2

364:13 365:2

367:22 369:15

method 24:14

25:10,15 171:17

249:8 251:1 264:6

330:14 344:20

345:16 355:4

358:13 359:2

365:1,8,17,18,19

367:2 368:14

369:14 370:20

methodologies

168:3

methodology

104:19 116:3

131:3,4 132:8

137:20 142:6

148:17 179:19

210:15 226:3

234:14 308:21

309:14,21 338:22

347:20 370:13

methods 23:7 58:9

349:19 375:2

metric 46:19 76:6

77:18,20 79:15

118:1 259:17

335:1 346:8

metrics 47:8

330:12 346:22

MIA 3:9 166:20

309:3

mic 307:6 313:9

Michael 1:21 2:2

2:10,13 382:2

Michelle 1:16 8:9

microphone 73:15

247:13

microphones 12:17

mid 9:15

midday 9:21

mid-afternoon

10:7

Mike 5:12 6:12

90:12 100:15

111:16,19 185:16

185:17 213:8,8,10

215:16 229:20

231:14 267:14,15

268:14 270:15

284:13 317:18

347:11

Mike's 116:16

Milen 1:21 6:10

365:21,22

million 14:1 19:22

266:7 277:11

295:13

millions 14:3,3

mind 78:8 270:9

322:13

mindful 128:16

Minelli 2:7 5:17,17

39:19,19 40:10,15

40:21 43:5,5

45:15 49:20 54:19

54:19 55:21 56:2

56:21,21 78:4

80:11,11,22 81:13

81:20 83:20,20

84:9,9,20 106:21

106:21 107:12,22

108:6,11 110:8,9

110:15 156:9,16

157:11 286:17

316:15 317:8,16

318:7 326:3 359:7

359:20 360:16

361:3 363:2,3

368:5 369:20

372:10,10,16

373:1,5,11

minimize 320:13

373:10

minimum 28:5

64:1,6 80:12

117:22 134:21

327:11 328:15

335:10 362:20

377:6

minus 369:6

minuscule 165:4

minutes 129:2,3

176:20 294:7

368:16

mischaracterized

128:2

miserably 328:22

misestimated 122:5

misleading 257:21

mismatch 66:8

misnamed 93:5

misread 99:17

misrepresenting

117:2

missed 87:22

missing 23:4 86:10

142:8

mistake 332:17

misunderstood

199:5 258:4

MITCHELL 2:7

mixes 158:1

mix-match 24:7

mobile 336:20,21

mode 12:14 332:12

model 15:6 28:1

37:19,20 125:14

130:10,10,14,19

130:20 132:14

135:10,12 136:5

138:9,12,14,20

142:5,19 206:17

248:5 309:17

314:3 329:1

349:14,17 350:12

351:14,18 353:1,5

modeled 58:5

modeling 124:19

125:3 132:19

137:11 144:16

145:5 174:15

347:16

models 13:21 22:15

31:11,12 33:7

103:7,11 131:2

133:11 138:1,3

150:13 183:22

220:12 345:9

352:8

modern 25:21

27:21

modifications

314:4 357:20

modified 187:21

modify 196:4

223:20

modulated 90:5,6

101:17

modulating 90:8

92:15 137:14,17

138:2

moisture 91:1

mold 121:14

mom 184:13

252:20 273:15

moment 185:9

195:22 264:11

297:16 347:18

379:13

money 124:5

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 411

162:22 165:15

233:8 236:15

248:18,18,20,20

249:2 298:2,11

302:6,7 304:11,15

305:5 375:20,21

monitor 340:13

Monte 255:2

month 113:22

167:15 313:7

334:1 383:4

months 5:1 49:16

52:17 313:8

382:20

moot 34:2

morning 4:3 8:19

19:15,18 64:20

67:11 86:15 179:3

179:5 376:8

morning-ish 9:16

motion 26:4 89:17

motor 91:4 102:18

motors 91:6,7

101:14,22 102:5,6

102:19 113:1

mounts 246:13

move 89:12 134:16

136:3 160:5 171:8

179:22 180:15

183:17 185:9

202:20 211:11

217:14 224:9

276:1 308:18

337:13 338:4

343:1 347:11

349:10 357:12,18

373:7,13

moves 190:15

moving 65:10

82:15 189:21

223:14 225:8

338:2 344:15

374:1 376:12

multiple 14:19 22:1

60:17 96:8,11

154:3,17 157:4

237:10 239:2

268:2 272:11,12

279:3

multiplex 59:3

68:17 69:3,3

71:13 73:6 74:7

74:12 75:1,11,12

189:13,19 192:4

199:7,16 204:8

268:6,10,19 269:9

269:21 270:2,3

272:21 275:5,16

multiplied 197:20

198:5,18,19

multiplier 196:20

197:17,21

multipliers 196:14

196:15

multiply 296:15

299:4

multi-speed 92:21

mutually 68:6

N

N 4:1

NAFEM 274:8

280:19 281:7

NAFEM's 291:1

name 4:4 5:7,10

11:20,21 12:6,7

64:20 73:11 74:5

74:12 93:1 159:2

192:19 232:12

378:1

names 73:17

narrow 60:16

national 1:13,15,16

1:20 2:5,9,15,16

3:7 7:11,21 8:8,10

8:12,14 9:20

36:10 73:13 127:4

127:7,20 179:15

182:10,11 189:22

192:22 193:20

198:1,4 232:13,22

243:7 247:16

263:22 295:2,5,15

295:15 296:11,16

297:19 302:2,9

305:1,8 371:7

nationwide 216:2

252:9 276:11

289:9 295:12,20

304:12

natural 299:1

nature 67:15 229:6

283:19 345:12

363:11

Navigant 1:18,19

2:2,4,15 7:1,2,5,6

7:8 75:1

nearly 217:20

necessarily 50:7,17

143:9 148:10

175:6 281:12

283:9,16 286:2,4

298:1 307:18

308:3 319:4,18

322:19,21 340:5

352:22 376:18

380:14 383:3

necessary 264:15

325:13 356:4

need 12:4 23:11

31:17 32:3 38:14

38:17 48:21 58:21

70:6 77:14 78:21

101:18,19 110:3

112:14 114:11

115:2,3,4 118:3

125:9 128:16

129:7 135:10

141:14 142:12

159:20 164:1

169:12 173:2,7

174:20 175:8,17

177:17 216:16

219:22 221:14

266:1 278:3 283:6

283:13 312:5

318:13 323:1

333:1 337:5

342:12 349:6

360:4 369:16

380:1 381:7

needed 87:4 166:20

needs 12:18 33:8

43:17 58:16

113:11 114:17

241:12,13 318:9

360:12 368:22

negative 234:8

negligible 362:22

363:16

negotiate 182:13

184:19

neighbor 23:9

NES 303:1

net 161:5 165:16

295:21 296:1,4,8

296:18 302:3,19

303:12 304:11

305:7

never 164:19 165:3

new 24:19 35:17

120:6 124:5

126:14 249:10

253:16 254:1

284:18 285:8

309:5,5 311:6,7

313:21 320:9

350:7 370:8

381:10

NFRC 50:20 53:12

331:1 370:11

371:6,7,9 375:3

nice 311:19 335:2

345:15

nine 222:7

nodding 77:22

non 172:2 310:11

noncompliance

30:15

nondisplay 76:7,15

77:12,20 114:8,17

135:16

nonrepresentative

120:5

non-chain 252:8

non-dealer 194:6

non-disclosure

167:8

non-display 14:7

65:20 67:13 68:4

75:21 149:2,6

150:10 204:2

274:11,22 304:8

372:19

non-electric 131:13

non-glass 373:4

non-normalized

170:22 171:2

NOPR 3:10 10:2

17:9 35:9 167:1

168:1,1 301:4

306:6 309:2 311:3

313:17,21 314:18

315:8,15 349:15

351:10,20 357:21

358:7,9,21 359:14

370:9 372:4

normal 374:13

normalize 76:7,8

normalized 160:17

160:18 161:6

162:1 350:13,15

351:19 352:5,10

normally 56:2

209:8 254:1 327:3

328:10

Northwest 1:13,15

1:16,19 2:5,9,15

2:16 7:11,21 8:3,4

8:8,10,12,14

73:13 179:14

192:22 200:3

232:13 243:7

247:16

Nor-Lak 284:6

Nor-Lake 2:11

5:20

notation 147:7

note 11:2 30:18

131:1 148:21

151:3 179:2 223:7

323:9 363:10

notice 3:10 8:21

17:10 18:21 35:7

36:2 148:2 149:2

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 412

160:16 168:5

188:15 378:14,15

noticed 80:2

288:20

notification 377:1

377:17,20 378:3

378:17 379:5

381:3

notified 378:19

notify 378:5,8,22

noting 315:18

NPV 303:1 309:16

NSF 31:22 46:7

55:4

nub 353:21

number 23:7 25:1

26:1 59:15 77:9

96:20 113:22

120:5 131:18,22

132:17 133:12

151:21 169:8

172:20 191:5

194:19 204:3

220:15 229:15,17

265:8,19 266:20

268:14 275:3

276:6,10 277:4,13

278:2 279:13

283:1,20 286:6

288:7 291:2

293:14 295:8,18

296:13 297:11,12

299:4 334:2

337:22,22 344:18

345:2 348:9 357:6

363:4

numbers 15:5

16:11 69:19 134:2

134:7,9 165:8

168:19 169:6

171:19 173:12

193:6 198:16

199:2 200:18

202:17 209:6,16

210:4,9 246:5

251:1,17 266:2

267:10,13 269:19

273:1 274:11,17

275:12 279:10

284:2,8 293:16

297:8 301:22

302:8 303:1,1

312:3 334:7 340:8

342:9

numeral 195:5

numerous 158:17

N-A-F-E-M 280:19

O

O 4:1

objective 202:22

observation 32:16

42:12 202:5

228:15

observed 37:9

obtain 205:18

obtained 180:12

196:11 204:15

obvious 93:15

201:2 305:10

329:16

obviously 48:13

98:18 128:22

166:11 225:11

298:19

occasionally 305:5

occur 63:18 141:6

298:12,14

occurring 127:14

occurs 22:11

OEM 187:5

offer 123:2 216:17

office 6:19 298:4

355:12

officials 55:2 334:3

334:6,11 335:13

offset 164:22

239:10,12

offsetting 301:12

off-cycle 136:18

137:6

oh 199:4 229:13

241:22 258:21

261:11 266:6

285:3 335:11

okay 8:16 11:11

17:18 32:8,11,14

46:13 53:19,21

54:7,16 66:6

69:13 71:15 73:10

75:13,13 84:3,22

85:1 87:17 89:11

89:19 91:16 92:11

93:10 94:5 97:5

98:9,14 99:14

100:1,12 101:2,10

102:1,21,22

106:20 108:5,8

110:15,17 111:15

112:18 113:14

118:11 122:19

123:14 124:11

129:14 130:1,5

131:16 132:2,22

133:7,22 134:11

136:1,15,16

137:22 143:18

144:12 147:21

148:12 152:2,15

153:18 155:8,11

157:10 164:5,11

165:11 169:7

175:2 180:4

185:13 186:6

187:13 189:6,9,11

191:4 193:10

195:18 196:8

199:4,21 200:16

201:15 202:2,11

202:15,18 206:18

210:2,2,11 213:7

214:9 215:20

216:1,4,5 217:8

219:13 221:18

223:6,10,11,17

227:19 229:13,19

230:10 231:22,22

232:5,6 239:13

240:18 242:16

243:2,4,12,13

244:20 248:10

252:4 257:13

258:6 259:1,9

260:10 261:11

262:11,16 263:9

268:1,22 269:3

270:13,22 271:1

271:10,13 274:3

275:21 276:3

278:10 279:8

280:6 281:6

285:11,11,15

286:16 287:20

290:13 292:5,8

293:21 294:1

301:16 306:18

307:16 308:6

312:17,22 313:10

313:12 321:22

322:16 325:5,8

348:20 351:22

352:2 357:7,17

361:7 365:19

366:19 368:11

370:4 375:7 376:3

Olama 132:16

old 202:8

OMB 307:13,19

once 25:13 42:10

122:9 159:21

236:8 264:18

266:2 276:6,11

283:7 284:16

295:12 302:2

339:22 346:21

374:18 383:1

ones 60:14 98:11

119:9 153:4

230:18 275:18

346:18,19

one-on 346:17

one-on-one 174:1

380:8

one-third 152:21

214:4

one-to 267:16

one-to-one 155:6

267:6 269:13

ongoing 29:14

online 249:11

onset 339:17

on-cycle 137:5,9

on-site 310:11,20

on/off 28:3

opaque 70:13

76:15 79:16

242:21

open 23:17 25:3

82:12 170:2

213:21 215:8

339:10 340:12

363:5 375:19

380:20

opened 119:5

215:14,15 339:12

opening 3:2 9:6

15:16 17:12 19:11

65:17 131:15,20

132:5,10 133:4

314:6 318:13

openings 133:13,14

170:3 344:7

openness 23:16

operate 73:2

115:10

operating 297:2

327:11

operation 114:13

332:12

operations 254:5

operator 101:14

188:5,12 340:9

operators 180:16

184:12 188:6

opinion 26:18

58:17 101:21

287:6 322:6 365:6

381:17

opportunity 9:5

10:10,14,20 16:19

25:21 34:13,18

105:18 148:16

166:13,21 261:6

376:9,16 379:21

381:6

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 413

opposed 91:9 173:3

173:4 241:21

250:6 378:7

opposite 252:17

optimize 31:15

87:5

optimizing 58:19

76:21

optimum 115:9

option 26:14 38:17

92:1 102:12

104:22 146:22

149:15,16 157:21

157:22 176:5

225:6 261:22

262:2 273:21

333:6 357:4

options 13:21 32:2

59:9,12 60:12

92:8 120:21

136:22 141:2,3

145:11 149:22

154:17 160:22

163:16 170:8

204:9 241:3,14

254:18 323:17

orange 303:9

order 12:19 59:9

87:5 105:7 128:8

143:5 158:3

279:13 282:4

321:9 329:13

342:12 344:5,16

350:3 356:19

357:3 379:7

orders 143:11

organization 5:7,10

organizational

12:5

organize 33:15

130:6

organized 35:16

173:8,15

original 25:19

37:18 95:20

283:15 350:5

originally 20:4

originated 192:9

Orlando 195:12

ostensibly 54:7

ought 8:20 49:4

164:17 269:12

275:18 287:12

outbound 139:2

140:12,15 142:12

142:21 143:3

outcome 22:7

256:16 381:15

outdoor 72:5,22

79:21 80:15 81:1

81:16 83:1,19

114:15 224:4

245:6,11,11

268:17

outdoors 80:14

83:12 84:6,7

244:22

outdoor-installed

83:7

outfits 246:4

outlined 158:21

Outlook 235:21

260:6

output 175:5

outputs 65:14

234:21 252:3

295:14 309:20

outset 17:20 19:12

29:8 32:9

outside 72:4,19

74:1 81:7 82:4,7

100:11 123:4

132:12 203:5

205:13 273:16

292:3 368:7

overall 30:9 47:13

56:14 59:5 64:11

83:10 87:10

104:21 106:4

109:6 142:16

143:16 197:17

198:6,13 204:21

205:16 207:10

292:22 301:1

303:6 317:6,9

341:9,15 360:15

361:19 362:2,15

367:3

overhead 139:11

139:15

overlooked 85:20

overly 125:1

oversight 48:6

oversize 217:2,12

218:18 219:22

221:10,11,14

222:8

oversized 217:10

221:15

oversizing 217:17

218:14 219:6

overview 3:3 9:12

65:8 105:22

130:10

overwhelm 344:10

overwhelmingly

364:10

over-simplification

214:12

Owen 2:8 159:10

159:10 287:6

368:13 369:10

Owned 19:20

owner 326:7

owners 184:12

owner-operator

254:6

o'clock 294:6

P

P 4:1

Pacific 1:13,15,16

1:19 2:5,9,15,16

7:11,21 8:8,10,11

8:14 73:13 179:14

192:22 200:3

232:13 243:7

247:16

package 71:19

packet 8:18

page 232:3 351:1

paid 143:14

paired 208:19

224:8,12,21 225:7

267:6

pairing 204:9

250:8 251:19

pairings 251:6

pairs 176:10

pallet 286:22

panel 2:3,7 5:18

6:2 13:8 14:3

39:9 40:1,3 43:10

46:18,20 47:2,4,5

55:20 56:6 57:2,3

57:5 81:9,18

83:16 88:5 89:6

107:3 119:17

120:6 121:2,5

123:19 124:5

269:7 271:9 283:4

290:4 317:20

358:15,16,18

360:6 362:3,12

363:8 367:3,6,13

367:15 368:21

369:2,2,8

panelized 318:8

panels 30:3 41:13

42:9 43:19 46:18

51:5 67:17 83:17

88:7 108:1,1

120:15,16 121:12

122:7,9 123:12

316:20 317:10,21

323:2 341:6 358:6

358:12 359:4,22

360:11 361:18

365:2,11 369:15

370:2

Panel's 65:17

paper 14:15 51:7

papers 132:17

154:4

paperwork 53:8,8

54:4

parallel 59:3

parameters 370:16

Park 2:8 6:3,3

Parker 2:9 8:13,13

part 13:14 16:10

17:2 18:14,15

21:15 28:18 33:20

34:11 38:8,20

39:8,10 42:17,22

42:22 45:14 48:6

60:11 67:1,19

69:7 79:22 80:19

84:14 95:19

102:13 118:16

127:10 130:15

137:13,13 138:5

143:9,15,15,16

144:4,21 145:3,17

147:15 155:18

156:2 158:16

163:4,9 168:17

194:5 234:18

291:11 305:10

307:8 309:22

310:1 311:6

317:15 326:10,15

327:9,13 329:3,8

332:9 340:2 346:5

352:22 354:2

361:5 372:14

377:4 380:14,14

380:15 382:4

partially 84:6

PARTICIPANT

285:13

participate 376:16

381:14

particular 25:16

26:22 51:18,22

61:13 69:5 81:1

152:13,13 157:18

169:8 172:11

173:6 176:4 185:3

237:16 243:10

255:7 289:17

300:7 304:5

324:17 339:12

370:14 371:6

378:13 379:6

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 414

particularly 77:17

87:21 146:8 148:1

191:13 248:22

289:20 359:3

371:15 376:10

parties 16:21 85:14

172:13 314:19

315:14 324:14

358:9 359:1

parts 22:17 59:1

65:11 139:7 241:1

318:5,5 326:10

327:1 372:15

party 23:5,11 44:6

172:10 326:18

361:13,14

pass 28:5 103:1

159:15 177:15

335:12,13 375:22

passage 133:18

passive 378:7

path 17:4 333:13

pathway 338:14,15

patience 382:17,19

patio 331:4

pause 311:13

paused 188:1

pay 238:6 250:22

255:12 340:14

payback 3:7 9:20

28:8 232:21 233:1

234:3,10,20

243:14 254:8,14

254:16,21 256:3,6

256:9 260:15

261:9,19,20 263:1

PBP 234:20

PD 54:22

peak 215:5

people 11:21 23:7

30:7,11 32:5 33:6

34:3 43:1 47:18

49:8 50:3 52:14

55:12 102:20

130:7 160:8

161:17 171:18

184:6,10 188:16

195:15 201:3,12

215:6 218:14,15

228:4 255:12

269:22 273:19

275:7 284:3

295:22 299:21

314:8,14 337:15

346:16 348:8,11

349:7 353:12

355:19 362:8

377:6 378:19

381:13

percent 13:18

14:20 15:5,8,10

40:3 47:20 60:1

79:8 100:7 133:5

137:3,4,5 143:11

151:12,22 152:5

153:20 154:2

170:12 190:14

194:5,14,16 195:8

195:14 196:22

197:6,22 201:6,7

201:14 218:11,14

219:9,9,22 220:10

220:21 221:14,15

222:9 230:14,15

252:9,19,21 258:1

258:8 268:11,16

268:21 269:11,21

274:1 275:2,3,12

276:19 277:9,13

277:17 282:20

284:2 285:12

287:15 288:10,12

289:1,7,13 290:5

290:6,8 292:1

298:5,6 305:16

311:16 317:20

percentage 59:18

60:3 72:12 79:4

144:7 180:21

181:17 182:2,3

183:12 198:6

220:14 236:13

273:2

percentages 199:17

perfect 174:9 223:5

292:19

perform 97:9

330:15

performance 20:13

28:15,20 29:16

30:9,20 31:15

39:21 40:5,15

41:3,7 42:6,12,21

46:2,19 47:4,8,14

51:22 59:1 63:5

63:14 76:14,17,18

76:22 79:7 80:6

86:22 107:5

110:10 116:21

124:19 203:8

316:6 318:20,22

319:17,22 325:1

330:4,5 333:8,13

334:12,13,22

341:6,9,12,14,15

performance-bas...

34:22

performed 97:19

104:1

performing 61:1

period 3:7 9:20

16:6 18:2 166:11

166:15 168:11

214:22 215:2,10

228:11 232:21

233:2 234:3,10,20

240:7 243:14

247:1 252:15,18

256:3 258:15

260:16 264:21

275:9 283:8

302:16 304:12

305:15,21 383:2,6

periodic 181:11,12

periodically 181:9

376:19

periods 167:22

214:16 215:6

254:21

permit 45:6 49:21

50:1,9

permitted 45:17

permitting 43:14

44:21 45:22 55:6

84:17

Perrodin 2:10 5:12

5:12 347:13

Perry 2:10 6:8,8

81:5,18 88:2,2,16

88:19 110:21,22

111:14 123:16,17

124:4,11 144:2,2

144:8 154:6,13,22

155:8,13 318:15

318:15 319:3

322:18,22 338:18

339:3,7,17 343:16

343:20 361:10,10

367:21 376:14,14

378:9,12 379:9

person 12:15 41:16

60:13 183:6 246:2

318:19 322:19

324:20 326:5

personally 49:13

52:11 378:15,19

perspective 10:17

46:15 72:7 107:1

108:2 112:2

228:13 229:21

283:1 286:3

328:19 331:19

pertains 69:7 72:22

Peter 2:14 7:12

phase 309:2,22,22

310:1,2 311:3

345:20

Phoenix 2:10 5:13

phone 334:7

phones 12:13

photocopy 179:4

physical 307:1

344:8 352:19

physics 330:17

Ph.D 1:13,15 2:4

pick 60:8 79:6

333:15 356:6

379:1

picked 14:9 91:6

112:5 120:5

150:10

picking 42:14

326:10

picks 326:5

picture 109:7 191:1

282:7 291:3

312:16

pie 189:15 190:10

199:15

piece 21:9 25:7

50:8 85:2 131:10

281:17 286:15

326:19,21

pieces 49:7 61:3

110:2 324:22

335:9

pinch 17:16

pipes 72:15

place 22:21 30:4

32:4 48:17,21

63:4 77:18 128:6

157:13 174:2,10

233:2 297:20

300:20 330:22

331:1,6 336:15

342:11 344:6,14

352:21 369:3

377:17

plan 10:22 13:3

84:19

planned 179:11

planning 313:1

323:13

plant 259:19

platform 122:8

play 185:4 230:6

players 184:17

290:19

playing 23:11

please 5:11 11:19

11:19 12:12,16,22

16:10 37:3 73:10

80:3 85:16,18

100:14 102:20

103:12 115:18

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 415

129:8 133:2 137:8

137:21 140:9

142:3 148:17

149:22 153:11

159:2,9 179:1

192:19,19 213:8

243:5 271:1

310:21 353:15

364:4

plenty 378:14

plug 220:11

plumb 43:20 44:1

plywood 368:1

point 13:17 18:10

18:18,22 20:16

22:12 24:20 27:7

31:19 34:2 45:4

61:10 64:22 65:2

77:2 78:11 79:20

82:8 83:6 91:21

109:22 116:16

127:7,16 147:3

148:22 155:1,2

170:4 176:7 200:4

207:15,17 213:1

220:22 230:16

232:17 233:2

245:18 257:19

259:5 267:10

280:14 281:8

297:21,22 303:20

315:21 320:1,12

325:10 342:4

344:15 346:14

348:4 354:6 368:4

370:6 382:12,18

pointed 74:5 282:2

323:2 342:18

pointing 299:8

points 16:1 65:9

105:18 106:6

107:8 113:5 117:9

154:14 155:10

161:9 166:5 176:4

205:3 217:7,11,22

218:1 238:2

policies 355:13,15

poor 323:5

pop 184:13 252:20

273:15

portion 89:18

132:1 184:4

186:17 189:21

portions 40:19

portraying 220:4

position 30:7

positive 234:8

303:6,21

possible 11:8 42:19

57:20 67:22 97:8

117:17 118:6

121:19 123:8,13

126:22 238:20

265:1 302:12

347:4 354:22

possibly 207:8

289:11

posted 12:9 336:1

potential 58:18

348:11

potentially 24:2,18

63:17 79:14 127:6

171:14 325:4

335:17 339:6

379:18

pound 208:11,12

pounds 207:22

208:3,4,6,8 209:6

209:7 216:15,17

power 8:4 27:1

28:22 136:19

137:6,6,10,11

PowerPoint 8:22

practicable 97:16

practical 125:10

331:11

practice 219:12

261:15 264:5

practices 87:15

pragmatic 29:21

Pre 4:16

precedent 20:17

28:16

preceding 278:21

precise 120:14

251:1

preclude 32:1

predict 57:21

125:14

predictable 61:5

predicting 109:3

predictive 345:9

predominant

230:18

preference 298:2

315:16

prefers 261:16

preliminary 1:4

27:15 33:12 35:7

35:22 36:6,8,21

85:4 103:9 104:20

161:7 166:13

225:20 250:21

288:13 289:4

299:15 301:22,22

304:2 309:1 310:2

319:14 324:4

premise 14:15,17

premium 228:9

prescribed 102:14

102:17

prescription

345:16

prescriptive 20:11

29:1 34:7 57:9

62:15 63:1,4

102:4 126:12

150:7 155:18

156:2 316:22

324:7 333:4,7,12

344:14 381:16

prescriptively

102:7

presence 206:11

present 1:11 2:1

16:14 103:12

104:8 234:14

240:15 295:21

296:1,5,8,18

298:16 302:3,20

303:12 305:7

presentation 9:1

15:22 19:14 34:5

65:7 179:16

351:11

presented 104:19

234:18 302:8

presenting 37:1

308:15

presiding 1:10

press 263:10

287:20

pressing 260:10

pressure 120:17

121:10 146:3

371:13 373:22

374:15,16,18

pressurized 373:7

373:13

presume 209:10

presumption

260:15

pretty 34:6 41:10

48:5 62:22 89:10

133:11 151:6

152:8,17 160:7

213:22 226:20

330:18,22 332:21

345:6 360:11

362:21 363:6

375:13 382:15

previous 43:13

110:4 119:11

149:4 160:11,14

235:5 297:8 311:8

316:4 351:6

previously 352:11

pre-analysis 78:12

309:22 311:9

pre-engineered

60:11

price 9:18 65:22

66:3,5 103:18,22

105:11 139:4

142:16 144:4

160:15,18 161:1

162:1,3 179:20

180:7,13 197:1,1

228:8 231:21

235:4 297:4

prices 15:8 65:19

138:21 235:11,13

235:20,21 236:3,6

pricing 236:5

primarily 29:3

166:19 184:7

187:17 189:14

195:21 203:7

205:13 206:14

211:17 243:22

primary 32:6 299:5

334:9

principally 57:18

prior 326:15

private 147:5,12

privately-owned

148:6

proactive 378:6

probably 19:1 20:2

20:10 21:20 22:4

60:16 63:20 64:10

64:18 74:10 83:10

84:4 111:8 114:11

117:13 118:3

122:1 129:5 130:8

143:10 144:8

145:15 162:7,17

170:14 194:2,4,6

195:8 201:6 209:7

209:17 214:2

216:20 220:20

221:4 241:11

242:4 243:1

245:12 252:20

253:10 287:11

291:5 293:10,16

334:3 354:21

362:21 368:19

380:8

problem 18:14,15

18:18 41:21 42:3

124:6 308:4

problems 19:1 23:6

32:18,21 315:11

procedural 16:14

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 416

procedure 11:14

34:10,17,19 37:18

61:20 75:3,8,10

101:8 118:22

119:1,6 131:3,4,7

132:7 136:7 137:1

197:12 204:16,19

204:22 205:22

206:2 211:10,22

235:10 256:12

262:22 298:15

313:19 314:5

315:8 316:9,12

319:12,13 330:10

337:21 338:2,22

339:16 342:20

345:2,21 346:20

346:22 347:19,20

348:2,4 349:12

350:4,10,15

352:15,17,22

355:7 357:3,20

358:4,21 364:21

370:18 371:6,9

372:3 379:17

procedures 3:13

10:9,9 11:3

308:11,13,19

316:18 330:21

340:4 342:16

354:3 370:9

371:15,16

proceed 10:8 13:5

32:13 61:17 64:15

128:17 175:19

179:10 295:2

proceeding 25:20

127:12 166:12

170:4 282:16

381:11

proceedings 127:11

240:12 381:14

383:9

process 4:21 15:15

17:2,5,12 18:17

33:17,20 34:12,20

35:18,20,22 42:10

45:6,14,16,22

46:5 48:4,16 61:9

67:1 80:19 84:1

97:10 99:1 110:12

122:14 127:6

128:9 147:16

167:12,20 168:2

179:17,20,22

180:6,17 187:12

188:21 199:14

216:8 246:22

266:13 319:11

320:2 332:3

346:15 356:3

377:20 380:16

382:14

processes 197:13

procured 182:21

produce 66:19

248:8 312:7

314:16

produced 236:1

product 21:1,4

23:22 24:3,5 50:4

50:17 54:13 56:8

57:15 66:21 67:19

67:21 68:3,4 70:8

70:15,19 80:1

90:19 95:1 97:18

110:12 204:10,12

206:9,19 207:4,5

207:11 208:14,14

208:21 209:9,12

286:11 288:8

318:11 336:17,19

337:11 354:17

production 44:13

139:1,9,12 140:21

142:20 326:21

productive 165:9

products 2:13 21:1

24:16 66:19,20

76:3 112:17 188:7

203:22 207:16

214:22 299:9

304:21 315:17,20

360:1 371:3

professional 45:20

Professor 249:10

profiles 214:7

profit 181:12,13

202:13

program 1:3 4:15

19:21 58:13

336:13,18 341:20

343:4 347:16

370:15 375:3

programs 282:14

progress 294:14

progresses 32:12

progressive 254:7

project 2:5 6:17

26:11

promise 295:5

332:14

promised 376:8

proper 342:5

properly 242:7

properties 51:1

proposal 70:11

370:20

proposed 3:10

17:10 36:2 67:7

75:8 110:4 118:22

119:1,5 131:4

132:6 168:5

204:16 211:21

226:22 347:19

348:2 349:15

350:14 351:6

352:14 358:7,20

358:21 370:9

proposing 17:3

74:19

proprietary 147:12

171:3

protect 147:14

protecting 146:14

protrude 72:11

prove 108:11

provide 4:20 16:1

32:20 43:3 94:12

94:14 138:17

163:17 166:3

167:7 169:4 193:7

202:22 247:4

248:11 259:15

276:12 281:8

306:9 336:22

350:6 352:4

provided 210:17

316:10 350:9

provides 16:17,18

121:9 126:21

265:7 314:15

354:11 357:10

providing 188:11

provisions 30:18

381:19

PTSD 13:9

public 1:6,8 4:5,7

4:17 16:13 127:12

146:18 147:11,14

174:10 181:2

314:19 359:14

372:4

publicly 139:20

148:3,3 312:13

publicly-held

139:22

publish 30:22

148:6

published 35:6,8

35:12 58:11 66:1

67:5 78:12 86:1

96:21 123:1 135:6

141:22 145:13

348:3 354:20

publishes 249:11

pull 207:11 293:12

293:19

pulling 209:11

purchase 143:5,11

233:19 236:13

purchases 143:13

purchasing 222:3

purely 110:2

purpose 16:13 32:6

43:1 48:20 58:5

66:16 103:16

127:20 142:5

263:13 309:4

purposes 12:11

127:2 150:16

purview 62:2,6

put 12:13 18:20

30:3 32:4 42:11

48:21 50:16 55:10

59:10 60:14,17

83:11 90:21

114:14 125:7

135:11 141:13

142:10 147:7

164:15 165:1

167:17 195:9

245:1 273:16

279:20 325:20

332:13 354:10,14

356:3 360:18

364:15 381:2

puts 34:3 322:20

328:17 340:15

363:8

putting 39:1 42:4

42:13 78:22 141:2

145:2 319:12,13

323:5 327:14

337:20

p.m 177:2,2,20,21

178:1,21 294:21

294:22 383:10

Q

quad 307:4,4

quads 302:14

305:14 306:4,15

308:2,3,5,5 336:1

quality 294:15

quantified 47:12

quantify 141:19

235:2 263:14

quantifying 108:20

309:15

quarter 222:15,20

question 21:18

24:10 30:6 63:1

64:5 65:1,16

69:11 71:18 74:22

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 417

92:13 94:20 98:17

110:7 111:2 117:6

122:21 125:22

126:5,8 131:12

133:10,12 134:13

140:22 154:6

155:16 168:14

218:22 221:9

227:11 233:4,9,14

234:2 240:14

241:17 249:1

256:5 257:15

271:15 272:3,10

279:1 290:17

307:21 323:12

347:13 348:7

359:12 363:19

364:17 365:14

379:10

questioning 169:10

questions 11:1,15

23:19,20 26:8

27:22 32:16 52:15

83:16 119:14

134:15 138:9

148:17 160:5

185:10,15 225:21

239:17 274:10

311:18 313:17

337:15,16 340:20

342:18 349:4,5,7

363:12 376:4

378:18

queued 347:10

quick 16:5 154:6

168:13 262:18

270:17 271:14

296:11 304:22

311:13 348:7

368:15 377:9

quicker 295:6

quickly 13:8 100:2

129:12 285:18

294:12 308:21

338:7

quiet 215:9

quit 193:22

quite 107:19

132:21 189:12

220:3 228:3 265:7

270:10 286:14

287:7 311:13,13

329:8

quotation 143:4

R

R 2:12 4:1 81:1

83:20 316:20

328:14 362:2

rack 59:2,3 60:8

74:8,13 137:10

racks 68:19

rail 368:8,9

rails 361:18 362:2

rain 114:18

raise 10:15 376:5

raised 313:17

315:21 381:7,8

Rand 2:3

range 73:2 96:15

113:13 117:2

122:22 123:6

230:3 258:16

273:11

rapid 277:22

Rasmusson 2:11

5:19,19

rate 22:20 23:21

38:17 75:2 208:2

238:10 240:8

248:13,15 249:2

249:17 252:8

258:1,7,14,14

259:4,20,21 260:2

260:4 264:13

277:4,22 282:20

285:20 287:7

288:14,17 289:13

298:6,7 371:11

374:13

rated 76:17

rates 198:2 240:4

240:16 241:11

242:20 243:10

249:5 255:13

257:3,9,22 264:20

276:16 284:22

289:2 291:22

297:18 344:8

rating 23:1,6,10

75:10 370:11,12

371:7 374:5,13,21

ratings 23:8,12

ratio 28:9 155:6

207:18,19 267:7

267:17

rationale 211:20

rationalized 214:14

ratios 267:11

Rauss 2:11 7:18,18

reach 214:19

314:10

reached 128:7

reach-in 44:12

372:12

reaction 273:5

read 23:20 145:8

156:7 169:18

311:4 350:22

reading 31:3 152:5

169:19,19 170:16

ready 160:3 171:7

real 109:7 114:12

114:19 115:10

194:19 210:8

212:20 261:15

262:18 275:17

341:10

realistic 26:18 27:2

159:19 323:20

332:11

realities 223:21

reality 339:11

360:12

realize 143:19

144:18 160:6

314:7

realized 73:20

336:3

really 13:20 21:13

23:3 30:7,15 31:6

31:17 39:6 51:5

52:20,21 58:18

59:5,13 63:5,12

64:8 66:9 72:22

74:6 78:19 96:13

107:2,15 112:1

115:16 116:13

119:2 125:8

129:18 131:2,9

136:13 153:5,6,7

157:22 159:22

163:11 164:1

171:13 180:6

181:7 183:9

184:12 187:18

188:4,6,9,16,21

190:18 194:18

196:3,20 197:5

205:22 206:13

207:18,21 208:17

210:21 212:2

213:6 214:13

216:10,13,13

217:16,18 222:3

222:17 225:12

226:1,18 245:7

266:16,22 268:8

272:22 284:16,19

286:5 287:12

289:1,12 293:18

294:15,16 298:20

306:13,14 308:20

311:13 314:10

317:5 328:4,4

334:11 340:13

342:4 361:4

365:15,17 379:14

382:5

realm 192:6

reason 25:10 126:8

152:21 160:20

188:1 288:19

334:12

reasonable 145:20

198:9 207:9 283:1

283:20

reasons 38:8 151:3

160:11 263:7

300:6

Rebecca 2:2 7:4

75:5,6,7 91:13

92:12 96:22 99:7

99:8 100:8 103:3

124:17,17 130:2

134:13,19 136:3

144:10 180:13

227:9 304:18

308:8,13,14

311:19 347:10

361:11 364:2

rebound 299:20

300:14

rebuttable 260:15

263:1

recall 145:12 372:6

receive 19:6 143:6

378:2 383:5

received 8:17

146:11 147:7

311:9 313:18,20

349:15

receivers 59:10

recess 129:20

recessed 177:22

recharacterize

192:12

recognize 69:3

153:16

recommend 111:13

117:10,12 137:20

172:17 174:6

227:12 366:20

recommendation

77:7 115:2 138:1

138:6 360:14

recommendations

17:2 32:20 103:10

133:16 138:17

142:3 380:11

recommended

359:2 372:2

reconsidering

313:18

reconvene 177:22

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 418

record 11:20 12:8

16:2 98:12 129:19

129:22 172:1,6

173:1 177:20

223:7 294:21,22

301:6 323:10

326:7 329:7

383:10

rectangular 188:18

recycled 253:14

red 251:17 289:12

reduce 15:4 32:3

63:8,10 120:19

121:1 170:5

352:12

reduces 22:21

121:10

reducing 352:14

reduction 105:5

122:6 158:9 159:5

163:6

reeds 230:21

reevaluate 112:14

reevaluating

163:21

refer 199:14

reference 146:11

207:3 281:9

referenced 16:11

references 371:10

referred 78:13

referring 65:21

205:22

refers 181:18

207:19

refine 309:19

311:10,10

reflect 108:22

141:5

reflected 147:9

253:6

refrigerant 238:8

238:12,17,22

239:7 243:11

refrigerants 25:21

27:21

refrigerated 62:4,5

refrigeration 2:13

6:14 14:9 20:7,15

20:18,21 21:13

25:7 28:16 30:4

30:20 31:15 36:14

36:17,20 37:6,12

37:16,22 38:6,16

38:18,19 39:2,12

39:21 40:7 41:12

43:11 51:15,18

57:19 58:7 59:8

64:4 66:8 67:8

68:8 69:7 71:4

72:8 73:19 75:2

76:1 81:9 86:5

89:13,22 90:13

92:5,9 93:12

100:16 104:3,7

106:16 107:1,17

111:19 113:8

114:11 115:5,9,21

116:12 118:18

119:7 130:11

131:1 136:5 138:9

160:6,12,17,21

162:14 175:7

176:10 180:2

181:6 186:10,13

186:17 187:14

191:17,21 192:7

203:13 204:6,17

205:6,12 206:12

210:13,16 211:15

211:22 216:12

217:4 224:8,13,21

225:6,14 226:5

228:17,22 230:15

237:7,10,12 240:1

244:17 250:7,13

251:5 252:14

267:3,5,17,21,22

268:7 271:20

272:5,7,9,12,14

273:18 274:13

277:20 278:2

279:2 281:13

284:10 300:21

304:10 315:4

328:7 330:20

336:1 341:7

refrigerations

317:11

refrigerator 21:5

22:11 44:13 82:19

83:4

Refrigerators

345:5

regard 344:12

regardless 64:7

76:20 80:12

362:18

regime 355:2

regimen 354:3

regimented 167:21

regimes 331:2

region 121:5

255:15

Register 8:21

377:19 379:2

381:3

registered 8:18

19:14 179:9 378:1

regression 244:2,6

regulate 22:5 48:2

53:20 367:18

regulated 21:16

22:9 53:12 319:19

330:8 333:3

355:20

regulating 69:6,10

332:1,4 335:6

343:18

regulation 21:17

21:20 22:6 30:13

33:16 323:14

343:13 366:11

regulations 49:18

53:20 127:15

353:8

regulatory 3:12

10:5 309:8,17

380:15

reinforce 159:11

reiterate 85:12

359:1 361:12

relate 50:12 80:21

related 26:20 71:2

81:8 102:4 119:20

124:14 240:3

258:12 260:1

278:15 307:2

381:14

relates 71:10

relationship 103:17

105:10 241:13

relative 86:15

165:19 361:19

relatively 265:10

relevancy 375:21

relied 243:22

rely 33:5 316:9

353:3

remaining 232:10

remarks 3:14 4:12

9:6 10:11,13

15:16 17:13 19:11

29:8 65:17 381:7

382:7

remember 131:22

359:8

remind 31:20

383:1

reminder 16:5

remote 21:2 22:5

71:5,13

removal 91:1

RENEWABLE 1:2

repair 122:15

236:9,11,12,16

237:16 242:10

243:15 287:8

repaired 241:21

repeat 89:16

156:15 306:21

307:11

replace 241:9

276:19 283:6

287:14

replaced 241:20

242:12 264:14

277:9 278:5

287:10,17

replacement 14:17

14:20 109:19

236:10 237:6

242:10,20 243:11

243:15 276:15

277:3,22 282:20

283:15 284:1,19

285:20 286:21

287:7

replacements

14:22 192:3

286:18

replacing 238:11

284:1 285:9

replenishing 285:6

replenishment

215:3

reply 276:2

report 181:12,13

202:13 274:15

281:18 308:1

reported 274:13

282:1 306:4,6

reporting 308:4

353:6

reports 139:22

140:2

represent 8:2 149:9

158:12 172:4

181:7 212:19

236:12 360:12

representation

213:14,22 215:22

representations

189:4

representative

104:4 105:1,21

106:1,11,15,19

109:9 116:13

118:15 149:4

154:11 203:18

208:22 271:21

289:11 364:12

represented 185:12

273:2 274:5

represents 205:2

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 419

224:7

request 18:1 53:2

124:16 308:5

316:13 371:14

382:18

requested 314:19

require 24:14 55:5

56:5 90:6 156:11

156:19 169:21

177:18 302:12

319:17 321:8

required 31:6

45:20 49:22 50:9

81:1 110:9 156:4

211:15 217:3,9,11

217:15,18 276:8

337:1 348:22

requirement 57:6

64:7 102:14

110:11 134:22

156:21 323:14,22

333:8

requirements 20:3

20:11,13 31:2

50:1 55:11 80:7

82:17 102:4

104:15 111:5

128:4 150:7

155:19 156:2

218:4 317:2

318:10 319:22

320:14 324:1,6,8

327:12 333:4,7,12

340:1 381:5,16

requires 54:22 55:4

157:9 329:11,15

331:20

requiring 315:18

research 52:16

124:9 134:4 144:9

154:4

researched 49:13

resellers 184:5

190:16

resembles 328:6

reserve 193:1

residence 41:7

residential 41:2

resolve 32:21

342:19

resolved 382:22

respect 366:5

respectively 161:12

208:11

respond 18:3,5

115:13 165:20

195:21 228:4

337:15 363:18

responds 291:3

response 25:4 29:4

43:6 61:19 138:10

176:16 189:8

196:7 210:5,10

223:16 232:4

278:9 292:7 293:6

294:3 316:1

responses 54:20

responsibilities

33:9 314:21

responsibility 30:8

33:21 44:10 47:3

314:3 315:7 317:5

318:1 324:15

responsible 40:4,18

40:19 41:1 42:2,2

57:4,14 315:9

316:5,16 317:15

317:21 318:20

324:16 378:16

rest 15:15 61:8

72:14 82:9 128:17

189:22 190:8,15

restart 244:5

restaurant 195:11

252:8 283:14

restaurants 212:13

213:19,20 214:15

275:20 288:11

360:2

restraint 22:22

restricting 47:18

49:8

restriction 39:1

result 61:4 105:8

130:12 339:1

resulted 128:8

results 104:19

161:8 196:10

203:10 250:16

304:1 305:1 306:2

316:9 341:21

352:19

resume 129:3,16

130:1 177:2,20

294:13

retail 60:4,6,7

retest 24:3 340:1

return 27:5 270:16

reveal 312:13

revenues 140:2

reversed 212:11

293:17

review 3:2 9:4 46:6

46:6 85:9 155:11

reviewing 46:11

reviews 46:1

revise 166:2

revised 350:11,22

357:10

revising 168:2

169:2 305:19

311:7

revolves 86:19

233:4

rid 76:12

ridiculous 44:2

right 5:5 19:4

33:22 54:16 56:10

66:12 71:22 79:6

90:14 93:6,9

95:12 100:6

110:15 118:13

124:7 129:14

135:4 136:4

138:11 140:8,9

144:10,20 145:1

146:19 148:10

150:3,20 152:12

153:7,10 157:7

159:18 174:14

186:11 191:15

193:14 198:10

199:6 209:1,13

210:7 215:7

216:13 217:13

218:2,21 242:2

247:9 248:9 253:7

256:9 258:9

261:17 262:1,2

270:5,9 275:13

279:5 280:14

285:4 290:2 292:2

293:3 296:21

300:13 307:5,15

313:13 314:18

324:3 325:22

331:2 334:21

340:16 343:6,12

348:11 349:9

350:18 351:3

356:13,14 372:12

372:18,22 373:11

373:21 374:17,20

377:15 378:11

380:4 382:1,16

rightmost 149:12

rise 260:6

risk 291:10

Rite 2:10

road 238:14

Roberts 2:12 6:4,4

86:12,12

rocket 121:18

rodents 48:10

role 183:9 184:21

185:4 190:14

roles 182:17 188:19

Ron 6:3

RONALD 2:8

roof 44:16 72:18

245:2,3

roofs 44:15

room 1:9 5:2 12:17

120:3,3 177:8

311:15

rotor 91:6

rough 264:18

279:14 293:2

348:9

roughly 190:12

260:5

round 131:18

310:7

roundabout 264:6

rounding 216:9

routing 119:18

row 197:20,20

198:5,16,17,19

199:1 211:6

RS 243:22 247:17

rule 22:7 33:12,17

35:9,12 36:3

53:14 296:4,6

298:20 310:21

355:10 356:6,8

378:8

rulemaking 3:3,10

9:12 17:10,12

18:17 35:3,5,21

36:2 128:9 168:5

170:16 172:21

197:13 259:19

282:16 353:9,18

354:4,5

rulemakings

256:14

rules 11:17 52:5

309:9,10

ruling 107:13

run 9:2 84:17 211:2

244:2,5 254:17

298:19 311:2

360:7 366:3 367:8

running 137:18,19

runs 211:3

Russell 209:5

212:10 275:6

R&D 312:4

R-factor 361:19

R-value 46:18 51:6

57:3,5 62:19

81:21 82:20 84:1

84:2 107:3,16

108:1,4 121:1

171:14 330:6

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 420

334:18 358:8,18

358:22 360:9

364:6

S

S 1:13 2:3 4:1

safe 337:11 383:8

safety 31:21 32:7

33:19 34:1 45:9

87:15 97:18

218:18 219:12

300:6 309:9

sale 22:12 195:3

sales 14:19 72:12

180:12 197:21,22

198:2 230:15

252:20 255:12

270:4

sample 231:10

265:10 312:6

362:18

samples 364:8

sanitation 46:8

309:10

Sarah 2:15 8:11

satisfaction 115:11

satisfy 324:14

satisfying 38:13

save 83:8,11 108:20

151:16 159:13

301:2 305:5

saved 83:12 151:9

297:6 302:14

305:14

saver 159:18

saves 233:7

saving 181:20

225:12 298:21

302:6 304:15

savings 14:14

25:13,15 29:3

109:6 165:2

233:21 249:15

251:11,14,20

253:3 255:6,10

263:3,21 264:1

295:16,17,20

296:9,11,15,16

297:2 298:12,14

298:17 299:5

302:3,5,9,16

303:7,15,16,17,18

303:21 304:11

305:4,8,10,12,20

306:20 336:3

344:11

saw 189:5 208:5

289:14 304:10,17

saying 31:4 47:19

79:14 81:6 107:10

116:14 140:7

145:20 159:12

217:8 222:11

249:13 269:20

318:17,18,18

320:11 341:5

351:16 360:5

367:20 373:13

383:4

says 157:5 283:13

302:4 335:11

369:22

scalable 330:17

scalar 240:11,12

257:15,15,18

258:2,3,10,13

259:2,4,14,22

scalars 258:16

scale 112:18 279:21

Scaled 280:9

scales 236:11

scaling 351:14

352:19

scenario 238:12,19

251:9,12 302:22

324:19

scenarios 239:7

254:14 255:18,19

301:19 303:5

325:4,6

schedule 18:16

35:5 176:20 248:9

312:19 346:21

scheme 206:15

324:5,13 327:4

354:6,7,8,18

356:5

schemes 355:9

school 283:14

science 121:18

scope 21:18 225:12

Scott 26:10

screen 5:9 99:9

336:2

screened 98:3,6,11

98:20 99:14,19

100:4 118:19

screening 3:4 9:14

36:7 97:9 100:17

118:20

scroll 230:8

scrolls 112:8,9,11

112:11

se 50:9 169:22

seal 43:21 88:7

121:21

sealed 374:11

sealing 46:22

seals 47:9

seams 343:22

search 196:1

seats 179:1

Seattle 344:10

sec 106:12 139:21

second 85:2 115:20

118:16 149:15,16

191:7 197:20

198:19 205:9

252:13,14 299:19

337:14 369:12

secondary 202:4

secondly 238:15

322:9

seconds 12:16

363:6

section 38:1 56:4

72:16,17,17

169:17,20 175:22

176:14 179:15

193:3 250:2

257:18 264:7

308:16

sections 111:11

232:10,15 234:19

308:16,16

security 177:16

see 4:6 5:2,9 11:6

11:16 15:21 35:4

37:3,9 45:8 48:1

56:4 77:21 101:8

105:19 111:16

112:1 114:2

119:12 125:7

126:22 127:19

136:12 138:21

140:5 161:16

164:9 173:2,12

176:3 183:7

187:20 190:11

192:6,8 194:13

197:19 210:21

213:8 217:14

219:15 224:5,11

229:13,16 234:8

234:19 237:19

247:12 253:7,8

254:15 255:20

260:14 266:6,7,8

267:4 268:10

274:5 277:12

282:3 284:21

288:6,11 289:6,13

291:14 292:13

294:18 297:10

302:8,9,19 306:4

314:17 336:9

345:13 346:19

349:14 357:11

362:1 375:3,10

seeing 41:2 65:20

107:5 195:15

254:13 277:8

278:6 289:1

304:19 305:6

seek 97:21

seeking 310:8

seeks 37:4 198:7

208:20 211:18

seen 121:11 165:3

183:12 184:15,16

207:1 291:16

292:11

SEER 162:5

sees 17:3

segment 10:13,20

11:5,8,13 64:16

79:11 182:9

183:20,20 185:7

190:13 191:5

segments 186:15

186:18 189:15

seismic 44:17 54:21

55:1

select 285:21 315:3

322:12

selecting 106:1

self 20:21,22 71:5

71:14,18 343:17

self-closing 156:12

156:19

self-contained

28:17

self-insure 231:4

sell 112:6 183:15

184:7,10 186:7

187:2,3 188:12

201:4 253:16

270:1

selling 65:22 66:5

68:2 103:18,22

105:11 138:21

139:4 144:4

159:18 160:15,18

162:1,3 186:19

195:1 197:1

sells 84:15 195:10

semblance 114:12

semi 231:16

semi-hermetic

112:13 117:19

226:18 227:11

228:9,20 230:16

230:21 231:3,10

semi-hermetics

230:5 231:8,19

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 421

send 16:4 45:8

147:3 167:15

293:9 331:14

349:4 377:9

378:16 383:4

sense 21:16 22:4

33:1 38:12 70:22

74:20 80:6 82:22

87:12 92:2 98:18

98:21 107:10

108:9 157:22

195:8 266:22

283:21 286:6,11

291:7 306:14

307:2,18,19

323:21 324:2

326:9 340:17

351:21 365:5

sensing 96:17

sensitive 146:9

332:15

sensitivity 327:9

sent 14:15 16:9

sentence 321:14

separate 24:6

34:10 36:13 37:5

37:11,15 39:20

87:11 88:5 131:8

234:1 243:21

245:22 247:19,20

265:16 272:9

341:14 354:9,10

separately 21:12

36:16 104:2 237:5

separates 119:6

separating 86:16

separation 78:9

87:11

sequence 15:17

355:21

series 20:11 23:18

26:7 82:22 126:9

338:3

serious 331:15

seriously 360:8

serve 21:21,22

48:20 58:20 69:4

127:19

serves 74:1 162:7

service 60:2 123:5

143:7 183:19,20

184:14 185:7

190:8,9,13 193:19

195:16 196:1

212:12 230:19

246:1 247:8 274:8

293:15

serviceability

231:3

serving 20:19

212:13

session 61:9 86:15

sessions 334:10

set 22:10 34:6

51:20,21 54:3

62:22 67:22 77:9

77:18 118:8 167:8

245:6 266:17

304:4 310:17

316:18 342:2

355:13 356:19

sets 67:20 246:15

309:6 355:8

setting 245:4

341:21 359:15

settled 359:16

seven 12:10 122:1

122:22 197:22

258:8

shaking 223:9

shape 91:9 218:21

226:8

share 13:2 125:11

145:18 146:10

165:18 189:16

205:16 281:19

282:17 290:11

294:2 336:9

363:20

shared 190:1,16

shares 189:17

191:10,13 193:14

196:6 292:20

sheet 65:6 141:16

163:2 343:4

sheets 181:11

shelf 285:1

shell 344:12

SHGC 334:21

ship 281:11 287:8

332:7

shipment 9:19

250:2 280:5 284:2

284:22

shipments 3:7

36:10 109:13,14

109:17 142:13

193:2 232:21

253:7,7,9 263:11

263:13,16 264:2,4

264:14,19 270:10

276:8,10,13,17,22

277:4,6,19 278:3

278:12,14 279:2

279:17 281:20

282:1 292:9 294:2

296:13,18 297:9

298:9

shipped 54:4 109:1

109:4,20 115:15

191:18 277:13

297:11 360:15

shipping 15:2

140:13 200:8,11

200:13

shocking 226:11,12

shoddy 48:7

shop 129:12

short 51:16 54:1

129:20 294:5

376:22

shorter 277:21

shortly 125:18

343:1

short-term 365:4

show 16:8 85:17

105:16 121:21

142:6 148:13

189:16 191:16

194:7 196:1

215:12 216:14

257:17,18 269:11

302:22 303:2

333:16

showed 199:15

223:3 304:18

351:11

showing 130:16

151:8 171:2 187:9

251:3 277:3,17

302:1 304:3

shown 91:7 188:14

204:10 208:16

211:1

shows 27:18 105:9

195:9 208:11

269:9

shutoff 119:4

sick 218:15

side 200:12 227:7

312:8 369:3,5

sidebar 12:14,21

sides 373:15

siding 41:5

sign 310:11

significance 362:2

significant 100:5

182:17 238:14

299:14 300:11

364:19

significantly

349:21 350:1

silent 12:14

similar 150:13

200:14 240:12

296:17 306:12

336:10

Similarly 283:10

simple 28:3,8 58:8

83:22 94:2 117:16

118:6 125:14

254:14 330:15

366:13 367:2

simpler 28:19

331:7

simplified 259:15

simplistic 125:1

simply 76:13,16

233:16 295:16

351:5 363:10

374:4

simulate 132:19

simulation 27:20

255:2,17 334:14

338:19

simultaneously

303:3

single 12:5 27:13

56:6 71:19 76:6

77:18,19 272:7

273:13 279:4

361:14 367:6,13

sink 351:2

site 43:15 44:5,21

48:8 84:19 143:16

327:1 332:9

site-assembled

29:18

site-to-source

298:18

sitting 72:18 80:8

285:1 329:6

situation 22:8

40:14 53:4 76:11

137:12 144:3

181:19 326:15

situations 183:7

six 122:4 152:3

222:7 230:6

size 26:21 92:3

106:11 107:4,5,8

107:11 108:18

110:5 111:9

112:19 115:4,5,9

117:9 118:2,3

122:7 149:1 163:6

216:14 229:17,21

231:10 245:16

265:10 288:9

290:9 292:16

312:6 359:9,15

360:8 362:18

368:20

sized 87:14

sizes 14:9 104:6,8,9

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 422

105:1,21 106:2,9

106:15,19 109:9

109:16 110:1

111:20 112:10,15

112:16,22 113:4

114:3,9,11 118:15

149:4 150:21

164:3 203:20

216:12 218:4

222:6 223:3

227:20 228:7

230:9 250:18

292:10,13,21

293:2 360:15

363:14

sizing 31:1 106:22

skeptical 152:19

slack 290:21

slice 365:3 369:14

slide 16:7 35:19

87:20 89:22 110:5

110:22 125:20

130:4 140:10

149:4 160:14

175:22 188:14

254:21 276:1

278:21 292:6,9,12

304:3,17,18 316:4

320:20 322:11

350:10 357:8,10

slides 8:22 65:3,5

68:19 69:21 85:18

104:10 116:1

119:11 128:18

130:8 139:6

166:16 185:10

240:16 306:1

342:15 347:10

352:1 353:2

357:19 370:22

375:9

slightly 68:21

slips 23:10

small 13:16,18,22

50:16 60:5 72:11

72:13 78:22 84:14

92:3 106:9 111:1

111:4,21 113:22

114:16 116:13,13

116:16 118:2

148:6 156:21

164:21 182:18

183:11 190:6

203:21 208:8,12

219:18 220:2,17

230:2 231:10

244:7 247:22

257:5 265:10

293:14 328:6

360:2

smaller 60:14 72:5

112:19 117:3

163:3 165:1,2

229:11 268:9

273:14 332:7

small-medium

114:14

smarter 13:13

smell 159:15

161:21 376:1

snow 84:11

society 297:22

298:3

software 347:15

sold 21:9,12 67:4

68:10 69:19

104:13 112:3,17

112:19 150:5

158:13 268:12

274:13

solution 29:22

44:20 56:10 87:6

Solutions 4:5

solve 53:3

solving 124:6

somebody 45:7

53:9 195:9,9

283:13 329:18

somewhat 160:13

264:5 345:8,9

381:9

soon 310:18 313:3

354:20

sooner 19:7

sorry 66:21 93:3

99:13,21 135:3

168:16 199:5,5

204:1 216:15

219:1 244:11

259:7 268:3 307:7

350:20

sort 12:3 19:9 21:8

21:14,18 33:15

51:10,11 53:7,7

53:12 54:3 65:5,8

65:12 83:1 116:3

121:4 152:5

171:17,20 215:12

249:19 250:8

258:15 259:15,17

292:21 334:22

355:20 360:20

362:16 381:18,18

sorted 105:7 214:6

sorts 266:18 328:1

332:5

sought 214:6

sound 140:9

sounded 140:8

sounds 125:15

341:4 375:13

source 235:16

265:17 298:21

sources 85:7

147:19 244:10

265:3 280:17

291:17

Southern 2:11 5:15

7:18 27:19

space 11:13 29:5

72:3 80:9 83:9

spaced 19:9

spaces 62:2,5,8

80:7

spacing 90:17

span 12:10

speak 11:19,21

12:7 39:6 58:3

78:1 108:15 319:9

340:20

speaking 39:4,5

81:5 272:20

spec 325:2

specific 22:3 28:21

97:11 113:3,7

138:17 158:7,19

167:6,16 207:4,13

209:13 213:20

310:9 357:19

specifically 58:4

83:18 146:13

159:4 165:7

359:16 360:14

369:22 373:6

specification

359:10

specifications

185:2 329:2

specifics 173:17

363:13

specified 49:17

170:7,9 188:8

328:12,13 371:12

specify 216:20

368:20

specimen 360:8

specs 330:22

spectrum 213:16

275:1 293:16

speculative 288:1

speed 28:2 29:4

92:16,19,21 96:10

101:20 126:14

137:15,17 138:2,3

spend 233:17

248:19 297:12

340:18 375:19

spending 124:4

249:17 297:14

spends 340:12

spent 49:15

split 71:19 72:14

73:21 84:8 86:6

111:11 190:4,12

194:6

spot 112:2 113:19

191:15 268:7

spray 369:22

spread 266:22

267:8 268:17

324:15

spreads 267:13

spreadsheet 257:22

259:6

spreadsheets

170:22

spring 35:9 36:3

47:11 157:12,19

170:9

square 14:3 43:20

43:22 59:22 77:3

77:4,5,11 111:6,8

111:21 112:5

113:12,20 120:16

134:20 135:11,20

229:18 288:14

328:13,21 329:19

350:16

squares 302:18

303:4,4

staff 45:21

stage 17:9 33:13

36:1 140:14

166:14 167:1

172:18,18 225:19

255:3,16 301:5

306:6 310:5 311:9

324:4 343:6

stages 319:14

stake 218:18

stakeholder 313:20

357:21

stakeholders 16:20

18:4 32:20 33:11

61:12 85:12 173:6

372:4 377:7 379:6

379:19 382:13

stamp 54:22

stand 318:5 326:1

standard 16:16

17:5,7,7 20:4,5

22:9,16 23:13

28:13,19 29:16

30:9 33:22 34:14

34:22 35:14 40:16

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 423

41:4,7 46:2 47:4

54:3 56:17 57:6,9

58:4 61:2,21,22

62:14 63:22 64:2

68:3 80:12 94:18

102:7,13 118:9

121:7 126:3,4,6,7

126:12,14 127:5,7

127:20 128:3

135:7,8 156:5,9

156:11 183:22

197:11 219:11

221:11 249:7

261:10 290:4

298:15 315:10

316:7,22 317:7

318:22 319:14

321:7,10 325:16

330:12 331:21

334:13 335:11,19

341:19,21 342:1

344:18 345:11,16

346:3,4 347:1,3

355:3,8,8 356:17

357:4 366:5,10

371:10 381:17,20

standardized 49:3

53:8

standards 1:4 2:4

4:8,16 6:17 11:5

19:21 27:8,11

28:15 32:1 34:7

35:17 36:13 37:5

37:11,15,16 39:21

46:8 62:9 63:19

68:1 71:7 95:16

126:16 207:14

240:5 259:19

309:5,6 318:21

320:9 323:4 327:7

327:14 334:12

335:3 340:4

341:12,14 342:3

344:14,22 354:5

356:2 380:15

standard's 127:1

standpoint 30:10

start 5:6,6 13:6

45:17 129:17

145:3 178:22

180:5 200:22

218:5 220:18

235:12 237:22

264:10,11 294:18

313:15 343:11

356:4 375:4

started 14:14 37:17

64:21 145:10

162:2,6 175:13

224:13 228:19

246:16 252:12

272:21

starting 18:17 62:3

213:1 221:5

233:18 272:6

starts 166:14

state 38:15 115:1

191:4,16 370:13

370:19 371:8

stated 55:11 59:1

65:18 317:9

358:10 375:22

statement 365:13

statements 3:2

17:19 269:10

314:7

states 1:1 126:17

127:15 156:18

198:3 235:14

255:11 334:5

335:12,20

statewide 19:20

203:6

static 346:15

stations 214:21

statistic 250:19

301:20 302:4

304:5 305:4

statistics 293:10

statute 34:6,9,21

35:15 170:17

331:19

stay 126:3

steady 370:13,19

371:8

steady-state 131:14

step 10:3 65:14

97:6 147:13

180:17 186:8

187:1,12,17 210:8

212:2 266:14

276:5 295:21

Stephens 2:12 8:1,1

49:12,12 52:8,11

53:5 75:20,20

77:8 131:11,11,17

132:2,13,22 151:2

151:2,20 152:2,11

152:15 169:16,16

278:18,19,19,22

279:8 280:18

281:10 291:8,9,9

327:20,20 344:3,3

362:7,7 373:20,20

374:7,9

steps 3:14 10:10

45:16 46:10

172:21 179:17

222:18

Steve 1:22 7:14

stifle 38:20

stimulated 223:13

stock 109:19,19

264:10,12,15,19

266:2 270:9,18

271:3,20 273:2

276:20 277:6

278:1 280:8

288:22 296:14

stocking 215:9

stools 25:5

stop 167:21 221:16

261:18 329:13

373:17

stopping 151:13

286:15 329:11

storage 78:22 82:6

208:2 214:17,18

storage-type 224:3

store 59:6 80:18

190:6 215:7

249:16 265:14,14

266:18 335:8

stored 90:20

stores 112:20

182:12,19 184:13

190:6,11,12 230:2

265:20,21

story 301:21

straight 244:2,6

256:12 298:5

straightforward

330:15

straight-forward

29:2

Straub 2:13 90:12

90:12 100:15,15

101:2,10 111:18

111:19 113:6

185:17,17 186:6

186:11,21 187:7

187:11 213:10,10

213:17 214:8

215:19,21 216:3

229:20 267:15,15

268:1,5,15,20

269:2 270:17,22

284:14 285:3,5

317:19

Street 292:3

stretch 368:6

strictest 195:8

Strini 2:14 7:12,12

strip 47:10 151:9

151:10,11,15,19

153:21 154:1

155:17 156:1,11

156:20,20 157:3,3

157:8,13,19

158:14 159:17

169:22 170:9

241:5,19 242:12

242:19

strong 315:16

struck 76:5

structural 48:18

358:6,11 360:3,7

361:17 366:5,22

367:17 375:12

structure 44:7,19

50:14 185:5 318:8

329:14 355:3,4

360:5

structures 45:19

362:13

struggling 32:22

280:12

studied 198:2

206:21

study 13:19 206:20

366:3 367:8

stuff 10:19 50:8

131:7 177:5,9

207:22 213:21

248:7 263:6 268:9

284:22 293:20

subcontractor 30:5

subcooling 92:7,8

94:12

subgroups 309:7

subject 21:20 35:2

95:15 160:1

submit 17:1 45:20

103:13 115:18

144:13 146:17

153:11 357:15

365:12 371:4,21

submitted 167:14

315:15

submitting 45:18

45:18 168:8,10

subsegments 190:5

subsequent 153:4,9

subsequently 43:3

substantial 86:20

86:21 170:14

379:3

substantially 153:5

171:15 336:3

subtracting 234:6

sub-classes 46:16

succinct 17:15

suction 25:17 98:4

sufficient 18:5

69:15 379:1

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 424

sufficiently 10:17

376:11

suggest 169:20

200:20 240:21

241:12 254:4

268:14 294:5

319:6 340:22

361:16 366:16

suggested 73:19

365:10 372:3

suggesting 172:2

360:20 367:4

suggestion 349:3

361:6,20 362:8

suggestions 77:15

349:4,5 380:20

suggests 69:15

170:2,17

sum 42:7

summarize 250:16

summarizing

311:20

summary 9:7 29:8

37:7 65:8 250:19

301:20 302:4

304:5,22 305:3

368:15

summer 172:18

174:6 313:10

Sundays 213:21

superheat 95:7

supermarket 59:6

182:9

supermarkets

189:14 268:10

269:1,2 275:20

287:1

supplied 38:4 40:6

suppliers 316:10

319:5

supplier's 353:3

supplies 39:11 41:5

supply 40:3 318:4,7

supportive 375:1

supports 365:13

suppose 181:19

272:11

supposed 48:12

54:9

Supposedly 335:5

Supreme 381:19

sure 14:22 16:10

18:12 28:11,13

32:3 33:1 34:12

45:9 46:1 57:13

60:18 63:4,12

68:22 69:1 80:2

90:18 91:3 94:19

98:19 107:20

110:8 117:11

120:10,13 126:20

127:11,12 128:19

132:20 133:15

135:13 145:1

152:10 163:22

164:4 169:18

177:7 187:19

191:14 207:13

221:2,21 241:5

242:6 253:16

258:6,10,18 270:8

270:13 288:1

300:15 305:20

308:11 311:20

316:21 323:13

327:7 330:3

334:21 343:8

345:21 346:16

347:9 349:1 357:9

364:1,16 367:9,11

368:18 370:7

375:14,21 376:20

377:5,10,12 379:4

382:15

Surely 290:1

surface 47:21 70:7

70:12,13,14 79:4

79:16,17 350:17

362:15

surprised 194:13

219:15 291:14

surrounding 10:8

11:3,4 68:14

134:15 185:11

372:7 375:11

survey 265:6,6

309:21

survive 252:13

suspect 229:2

sweep 375:17

sweet 112:1 113:19

268:7

switching 96:10

296:3

system 20:18 30:4

31:16 36:14,18

37:22 38:6,16,18

38:22 39:2 41:5,9

42:11,14,15,21

47:1,4,5 51:15,18

56:14,20 57:19

58:15,19 60:8

67:8 68:8,17

69:10 72:8 74:6

74:13 75:2,11,12

81:9 87:1,10 89:7

90:7 93:20,22

94:11,14,16 95:20

104:7 119:7,17

120:7,11 121:5

135:8 137:10

145:16 160:22

162:9 175:7

176:10 180:3

185:21 186:3,7,17

187:2,14,16 192:5

203:11,13 204:5,6

204:8,9,20 205:7

205:12,18 206:12

207:21 208:19

210:14,16 211:2

211:16,22 212:5

216:18,20,21,22

217:4,17 221:4,15

224:2,4,8,12,13

224:21 225:3,6,8

225:14 226:5,5

228:17 237:7

239:1 240:1

244:17 250:7

251:5 267:21

272:9 283:11

286:1 287:17

300:21 304:10

315:5 320:1 328:7

328:8

systematic 206:20

systems 2:7 5:18

30:21 32:6 37:6

37:12 39:9,12

40:7 41:18 44:15

58:7 59:3,3,8

60:11 66:8 69:9

72:12,15,21 73:22

74:8,21 87:4

89:13,22 92:2

93:14,18 104:3

106:16 113:8

114:10 116:6

117:3 118:18

123:19 124:1

160:12,21 186:10

186:13 191:21

192:4 230:2

237:10,13 238:17

243:11 250:13

267:3,5,17 272:5

272:12 273:18

275:7 277:21

278:2 279:3

284:10 299:17

345:7 362:12

S-E-S-S-I-O-N

178:20

S.W 1:9

T

T 81:14 83:22

table 3:1 134:14

162:22 191:18

228:4 247:20

269:9 270:3 274:5

282:21 380:12

tables 168:15

247:19

tack 45:13

tackling 346:17

Tafco 2:14 7:12

take 9:15,21 10:7

12:16 15:15 18:8

64:13 70:16 73:3

75:4 90:7,18 97:4

99:5 100:19 103:4

125:17,18 128:22

129:1,2,6 144:22

147:13 157:12

166:20 174:2

175:11 176:18

177:1 179:1

206:18 234:11

250:9 253:19,19

256:12 259:20,20

263:4 278:20

294:5,10 313:15

327:21 335:14

346:7 361:17

362:12 365:3

369:2 374:15

375:8 378:21

taken 129:21

takes 230:22 233:2

297:20 313:16

352:21

talk 20:12 23:7

27:22 34:13,18

69:18 82:5 103:5

130:13 138:12

139:2 148:12

167:5 172:14

182:18 193:8

248:14 251:10

264:16 267:20

271:19 272:4

303:7 308:20

310:20 379:14,21

talked 67:10 174:4

255:6 379:16

talking 20:6 21:14

43:7 66:2 71:19

71:21 96:16

100:10 130:17

177:5 198:21

227:22 230:1,3

242:18 244:16

257:10 266:16

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 425

272:6 279:2,7

295:8,19 312:2

313:7 323:19

326:4 344:11

353:21 354:21

364:20 368:21

369:21 372:13

373:1

talks 193:17

tall 360:4

tallying 232:18

tank 194:1

target 200:19

task 42:22 245:3

taught 334:2

tax 197:21 198:1

taxes 139:17

255:12

team 172:14

200:15 380:1,7

team's 200:5

tech 66:13 149:19

163:16 225:5

251:9

technical 26:11

32:2 171:13

173:22 206:22

207:2 241:3,14

302:21 379:22

380:7,13,16,17

techniques 92:21

technologically

149:20

technologies 1:16

7:17 64:12 73:4

85:5,14,19,22

86:3,10,21 87:8

87:20 89:10 92:5

93:12,19 94:4

97:9,11,20,22

100:22 103:21

104:18 105:4,7

113:1 118:17,19

118:21 119:12,14

123:7 125:19

126:9 130:18

154:14 225:13

technology 3:4

4:15 9:13 25:16

36:7,15 64:16

85:2,3 93:22

97:14 98:20

100:18 101:3

112:12 116:17

119:8 135:15

136:22 145:11

149:10,14,16

154:16 155:7,10

158:1,8,16

tell 53:9 57:2

102:20 136:11

148:10 157:18

164:8 192:14,15

286:4 301:20

328:18 362:11

368:15

telling 188:6 281:7

tells 297:9 374:12

temp 114:15,15

116:20

temperature 26:14

26:17 27:6 48:9

60:19 81:16,17

96:18 175:10

207:12 224:4

251:17 300:7

369:4,5,9

temperatures 73:2

81:15 83:3 132:11

ten 12:10 77:4

129:1 192:4

194:14,16 201:6

201:12 207:12

209:14 238:9

248:21 252:11

270:2 274:2

276:19,20,21

277:16 280:9

286:21 287:2,15

290:4,8,8 291:6

291:15

tend 11:3 60:10

196:2 215:5

tends 343:17

tens 305:16

ten-minute 294:10

ten-ton 217:17

ten-to-one 269:10

ten-year 252:18

term 285:20 302:7

314:15 315:1

322:10,14 364:13

termination 26:9

26:14,17,19 96:18

terminology 74:16

285:22

terms 16:15 17:4

20:17 24:22 25:14

31:14 33:6,8

35:18 49:16 54:1

64:4 74:20 109:13

109:18,18 127:15

127:17 146:2

161:12 166:4

167:12 168:3,6

173:11,16,17

215:12 234:11

245:7 277:18

297:11 320:14

321:5 323:19

356:8 374:11

380:5

terribly 237:3

299:14

territory 195:2

test 3:13 10:9,9

11:3,14 20:22

24:14,14 25:10,14

34:10,16,18 37:18

57:2 75:3,8 101:8

118:22 119:1,5

131:3,4,7 132:7

136:6 137:1

145:14 159:15

161:21 204:16,18

205:22 206:2

211:10,22 308:11

308:13,19 313:19

314:4 315:8,17,19

316:9,9,12,18

319:12,13,16

330:10,13,21

336:14 337:21

338:2,21 339:16

339:20 340:3

342:16,19 343:10

345:2,20 346:1,1

346:19,22 347:19

347:19 348:2,4

349:12 350:4,9,14

352:15,17,21

353:3 354:3 355:4

355:7 357:3,20

358:3,21 360:7

362:1,9 364:20

365:4,8 366:8,13

366:17 371:3,4,9

371:15,16,22

372:2,17 373:8,14

373:21 374:18,19

376:1 379:16

tested 58:7,22

339:15 351:19

352:9 363:15

368:22

testing 24:7,8 37:20

52:10 63:16,17,18

110:10 123:22

132:18 314:2

315:7,9 316:11,17

317:4 320:2 321:9

330:20 331:2

337:12 352:13,20

358:1,15 361:22

363:20 370:10,10

370:18 373:18

tests 55:17 316:8

319:4 337:18

338:3,8,11 345:22

346:6 358:3 370:8

371:5,21

th 383:2

thank 5:4 15:12

19:4 29:6,7 32:8

54:16 66:6,12

69:11,12 71:15

74:14 79:18 83:14

85:1 89:3,4,7

90:11 92:11 93:8

96:3,4 98:7 99:22

110:16,17 111:15

117:4 128:15

133:1,7 134:12

138:7 142:17

143:18 153:15

155:13,14 159:8

165:11 169:14

171:6 175:2,20

187:22 189:10

192:21 194:9,10

195:18 196:9

200:16 201:19,22

202:18 210:2,12

214:9 216:1,5

223:6,10 230:10

230:12 232:6

239:4 242:16

243:12 254:19

257:11 260:8,9

263:9 269:3,4,14

272:2 279:7 280:6

281:5 287:19

292:4 293:21,22

301:3 303:22

306:10,16 308:8

312:9,16 313:11

319:2 322:16

336:4 357:7

369:18 372:6

376:3 382:2,3,4,8

382:22 383:7

Thanks 8:15 61:18

79:12 100:12

102:21 127:20

128:14 129:17

157:14 170:18

171:5 195:19

240:18 259:9

279:8 295:4

365:20 368:12

370:4 375:7

theirs 273:16 291:2

theoretically 340:9

therefor 289:21

thermal 2:10 51:1

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 426

121:2 124:13

366:21

ThermoCor 2:12

Thermocore 6:5

thermostat 300:1

they'd 194:4

253:13 270:4

thicker 123:12

thickness 57:2

81:19 83:17

122:10

thicknesses 121:22

155:4

thin 364:8 365:3

369:14

thing 13:9 45:10

50:10 53:5 54:14

63:9 65:2 77:10

77:11 79:19 87:11

91:22 107:2

121:20 130:13

136:5 172:22

175:4 203:14

211:8 218:13

219:4 220:6

228:14 247:8

252:6 257:2

260:14 281:15

288:6 291:6

296:17 297:19

311:22 329:3,15

330:9 334:9 340:2

344:9 345:3,5,20

372:2,8 375:15

376:8 377:5,16

380:10

things 22:3 32:22

38:21 48:10 49:20

51:2 53:7,14

59:11 64:22 79:2

90:21 123:21

125:12 130:21

148:21 157:4

163:8 174:11

183:21 206:14

222:3 239:2

245:12 247:10

254:12 255:15

263:5 282:10

283:18 296:19

297:5 302:2 322:4

328:1 334:15

335:2,17 344:17

344:22 349:6

357:5 379:4,8

380:18

think 8:17 11:8,18

18:2,4,14 21:17

25:11,20 29:12,14

30:15 31:3,16

38:10,12,12 40:21

41:1 42:17 44:11

47:1,11 48:5,19

49:6 54:2 55:15

56:9,13 57:13

58:16 63:7 64:9

64:10 66:9 70:5

70:11,21 73:5

74:19 75:14 77:8

77:14 78:4,7

79:10,12,13 80:5

81:6,8 82:4,11,21

90:3 93:15 95:21

98:10 101:12,19

102:3 109:21

110:6 112:4,14

113:8,11 116:12

116:14 117:15

119:10,22 121:22

122:5,12 125:8

126:19 128:21

133:9,13 136:8

137:2,3,19 146:19

153:12 157:17

159:13,19 162:6

162:13 163:8

164:6 165:6 166:1

170:11,13,20

172:8 173:3,4,7

176:18,21 177:3

186:15 187:14,17

192:6 193:8,17

194:16 195:6,7,12

195:20 196:3

200:19 201:4,20

209:3,5 212:10,18

213:17 214:3

215:17,18 219:21

220:3,7 221:21

222:1 223:1,12,19

226:10,15 227:7

229:21 232:16

234:16 238:6

239:9,10,11 241:4

241:7 243:13

244:14 252:6

253:18 256:20

263:2,7 265:10

268:15,20 273:12

274:2 275:4,12,13

281:4,6 282:4,5

286:17 287:6,11

287:13 290:6,18

291:1,16,19 292:2

293:8,13 294:6,8

301:14 311:14,15

312:7 314:6

315:21 318:17,18

320:5,9 323:2

324:10 328:1

329:16 330:3,21

331:5 332:20

333:1,1,19 342:10

347:7 354:20

361:13 364:3

366:14 369:10

371:16 376:1,15

378:6 379:15

382:9,11,12

thinking 14:2

57:16 78:18 94:9

163:10 378:22

thinks 13:13 99:19

190:22 332:16

third 23:5,11 31:19

205:12 211:6

thought 74:4 117:7

189:5 193:1

216:10 226:10,11

239:13 272:19

304:2 307:8 331:9

347:14 360:19

364:15 365:5

thoughts 70:18

89:9 134:14 138:8

189:3 314:9

376:17

thousand 56:18,22

thousands 56:15

three 29:12 35:12

35:14 60:14 104:6

106:8 114:3 122:8

131:19 138:22

140:18 142:15,18

142:22 146:12

147:18 182:16

190:13 191:21

194:6 198:14,16

199:2,17 203:20

205:17 212:13

230:4 232:15

261:8 294:5

348:16,19 367:21

three-and-a-half-...

261:20

Three-phase

112:22

three-quarters

220:19

three-year 260:17

261:19 356:11,16

threshold 360:21

361:21

throw 209:8

tied 346:9

tight 18:16 55:4

Tim 1:14 8:5

time 11:19 12:5,7

13:2 18:5,10 22:1

25:7 26:9,18

31:16 33:13 35:4

36:22 40:3 54:8

81:14 84:18 86:18

90:14 129:15

137:14 140:17,19

149:10 163:1

167:22 172:9,10

173:8 175:15

214:22 215:3

228:12,20 233:7,8

237:14 243:11

247:2,10 249:18

256:16 258:2

260:7 263:18

275:8 276:7

278:11,17 282:7

283:16 290:9

298:17 306:21

319:15 325:10

334:20 340:5,18

342:1 343:6 345:1

354:20 355:16,19

363:4,6 365:6

375:19 379:1,14

times 14:4 21:11

38:4 82:6 90:6

120:1 142:15

143:3 194:22

214:20 215:13,14

238:9 276:20,21

280:9 295:7,18

300:8 312:5

339:11,12

time-of-use 236:4

Title 20:5 27:10

49:13,16 50:4,4,6

50:8 54:13,13

61:20,21 62:3,9

62:11,13 126:2

381:11

TMP 7:13

today 4:9,18 9:1

10:22 13:3 18:3,6

20:6,12 28:1

31:10 35:3,22

36:4 104:14

158:14 170:7

181:17 232:15

238:9 294:17

315:22 333:3,9

336:13 353:22

354:14 382:9

told 165:13,14

ton 83:12 216:22

tongue 120:12

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 427

121:7,8

Tonka 6:8 318:16

361:10 376:15

tool 306:14 307:1

tooling 122:4,11

top 15:18 51:14

72:2 131:18

144:10 198:16,17

199:1 224:6 245:4

258:10 269:15

271:19 293:4

topic 36:4 262:12

total 42:7 47:21

72:12 87:6 108:20

131:19 140:2

151:8 152:6 182:4

204:19 208:17

211:4 267:4

281:20 296:21

totally 56:9 194:20

331:18 364:9

touch 288:3

touting 159:16

tracer 370:20

track 11:10 13:22

145:2 192:4 231:6

354:9 355:17

trade 22:22 248:18

249:21 335:16

traded 148:4

334:18

tradeoffs 334:15

trades 44:18

trading 188:16

tradition 5:5

training 334:10

transact 182:13

transcript 12:8

transfer 138:4

279:18

translate 258:1

transparent 205:21

travels 383:8

treated 336:11

trend 217:22 218:1

290:18

trick 331:21

tried 34:11 153:11

tries 233:13

trigger 50:2

triple-glazed 62:18

trouble 380:22

trucks 286:19

287:3

true 79:3 152:14

159:16 231:11

truth 162:17

try 11:10 22:4

29:11 77:9 82:12

96:8 108:21 130:6

131:10 165:7

166:3 250:20

308:17,19 332:11

345:1 382:15

trying 52:17 61:8

83:10 107:14

108:8 109:15

114:1 123:10

173:13 215:12

233:10 280:12

282:15 314:10

320:13 321:22

323:20 324:3,10

325:12 327:15

330:12 331:10

334:22 335:21

338:20 341:4,10

346:20 366:12

382:20

TSD 23:15 24:22

26:8 27:16 28:5

31:7 67:5 96:21

104:20 123:1

124:18 125:8

134:8 135:20

144:22 150:22

154:9 155:11

163:19 166:2

168:15,22 169:2

203:15 234:15,18

249:12 254:22

259:6 260:22

302:22 311:6

TSDs 308:1

tube 135:15

tune 44:22

turn 25:2 64:1

192:19 204:4

259:4,7 292:12

300:2

turned 12:19 299:2

turning 308:8

turns 27:14

TV 22:10

twelve 197:6

twice 117:20

287:10,11 293:14

two 19:15 28:20

38:10 39:20 49:15

64:22 67:12 71:6

76:12 77:5,22

83:2,15 92:21

104:8 111:11

142:15 148:13

149:17 161:8,9

179:16 181:2

185:9,15 190:5

191:3 194:7 195:8

195:14 206:8

208:8,15 209:7,17

209:19 221:17

230:4 233:12

234:21 240:15

241:8 246:3 250:9

250:13 265:3

266:7 277:10

278:6 288:10,12

295:14 299:6

300:11 302:2

308:15 310:1,2

313:8 314:6

316:13 322:3

325:11 337:15

346:4 351:11

356:1 357:19

360:6 366:1 375:2

375:9

two-thirds 214:4

two-variable 79:15

two-year 254:8

type 16:16 50:17

68:3 69:2 71:3,12

72:7 96:10 110:3

112:17 113:1

115:16 149:1

157:19 244:6

255:7 258:9 265:8

266:21 296:20

333:4 349:17

types 59:10 78:20

92:19 96:9,11

109:4,14 197:15

199:18 248:3

265:13,19 266:3

267:11 275:7

302:13 359:22

360:1

typical 50:3,22

233:5 258:7

266:17,19 287:1

360:2,3,9 361:4

362:12

typically 51:7

63:18 72:4 123:4

134:3 143:5

158:13 195:15

214:16 230:5

236:5 237:7 246:1

246:17 250:12

251:12 254:7

259:18 262:14

273:19 282:10

317:12 356:11

363:5 367:21

U

U 371:5

UL 336:12,15,17,19

337:4,6,10

ultimately 330:3

uncertified 27:4

uncomfortable

163:9

uncover 89:11

underlying 154:20

undersized 66:11

understand 31:8

31:10,17 71:9

94:20 100:4

111:22 125:9

135:9 148:4

165:18 169:11,12

171:4,14 192:14

254:17 256:7

271:7 279:15

281:19 286:8,14

291:19 320:2,17

332:2 341:4,10

342:12 349:6

355:18 365:16

understanding

27:3,6 40:1

124:20 219:5

240:14 254:16

279:20 332:3

342:8 380:4

understood 47:7

257:20

underway 312:20

undiscounted

306:4,7 308:3,5

undue 371:17

unfamiliar 177:10

Unfortunately

280:4

unified 23:1

uniform 120:17

121:10

uniformity 60:19

unique 68:3 121:9

367:12

unit 20:22 21:7,15

21:19 22:5 24:1,2

28:19 38:3,19

51:19 60:8,10,13

60:17 64:5,6 69:8

72:1,3 73:1,22

74:2 75:10 84:4

104:11,13,16,18

105:3 114:15

116:20 141:6

175:6,12 205:14

244:7 245:2,11,12

245:21,22 247:20

247:20,21,22,22

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 428

273:20 279:4,21

283:7 296:15

326:8,12 337:12

unitary 162:4,8

UNITED 1:1

units 15:4 21:21

52:4 55:10 60:4

67:14 69:19 74:2

83:19 104:5 109:1

112:3,18 115:15

203:9 220:10

253:9,14,14,20

254:1 268:2

269:22 271:22

272:1 276:6,16,19

277:12 279:18

287:15 296:14

298:10 306:12

332:5,7,9 349:17

360:15 361:2

363:20

universal 197:21

University 249:10

unrealistic 320:7

unreasonable

145:21

upcoming 376:21

378:3

update 167:1

364:18

updated 354:16

urethane 369:15

urge 331:15

usage 43:7 44:1

347:17

use 3:6 9:18 21:6

23:22 24:1,4,17

25:9,10 26:18

32:3,5 36:9 37:19

49:8 65:7 70:11

70:13 74:16 79:9

82:10 88:4 95:7

102:20 106:5

112:11 126:6

139:17 147:19

149:7 151:9,17

158:2 163:6

175:12 181:2

202:21 205:2

209:14,21 211:20

213:18 214:7

235:10 236:3

240:6 244:8 250:3

255:14 258:7

259:2 260:5

263:22 265:9,21

276:7 277:14

278:13 288:8

289:9 297:3,12,18

298:5,18 299:3,21

299:22 300:8,10

310:14 321:7

329:3,5 340:3,5,7

340:8 344:21

345:4 362:19

365:18 366:13

367:2 370:20

useful 11:9 12:2

61:15 99:12

108:18 109:10

177:4 189:2

200:15 243:16

254:16 272:15

286:13 292:18

347:8 363:22

user 22:17 115:11

143:14 235:3

265:22

users 283:5 286:9

uses 211:12 233:6

usual 184:2 203:22

usually 18:9 35:11

164:21 301:11

339:20 378:8,20

utilities 174:8

235:14

utility 3:10 10:3

19:20 67:19 76:9

97:17

utilize 70:10 127:1

321:5 324:7

U-factor 358:15,17

370:10,17

U-value 330:6

U-values 328:14

U.S 4:6 265:17,18

314:18

V

vague 349:16

valid 374:19

validating 274:18

valuable 223:19

value 25:15 58:14

81:2 83:21 94:2

184:17 188:22

295:21 296:1,5,8

296:18 302:3,20

303:12 305:7

316:21 362:3

365:5 367:1

values 86:17

170:22 171:2

198:8 328:15

valves 59:11

VANDEVORT

2:14

variable 28:2 29:4

60:5 92:16,19

96:10 101:19

203:8

variables 122:14

variation 305:7

variations 329:4

varies 140:16 151:7

variety 22:2 24:5

27:12 345:13

various 24:12

29:19 103:19,21

105:18 180:10

186:15 189:17

197:14,15 199:16

199:17 203:2

206:21 208:5

265:19 266:3

282:14 297:7

335:9 375:4

vary 143:20 236:22

255:14,19 352:5

varying 48:14

vending 294:12

vents 88:20

verbal 138:10

176:16

verification 378:10

verify 279:9 318:9

323:13 372:11

verifying 325:19

versa 228:18

334:20

versus 67:13 71:5

71:13,13,19 76:6

76:16 80:8 81:2

81:16 84:7 107:11

116:20 230:15

239:18 269:12

298:2

viable 254:18

vice 228:18 334:19

view 24:20 30:11

46:18 164:1 233:3

297:21,22

violate 171:3

virtue 229:5

visibility 195:22

visit 167:3 310:13

visited 52:14

visiting 379:16

visual 179:8

volume 21:9,15

76:3,8 140:16

volumes 120:4

W

wait 70:1 219:1

350:19,19

waiting 200:17

walk 32:5 50:13

191:18 234:7

252:13 265:4

266:19 295:18

299:17 300:21

316:4 339:21

349:17

walked 334:9

walking 200:7

235:4 287:2

walk-in 1:4,5 4:8,9

4:17,18 13:18

14:7 15:6 21:16

22:17 28:18 34:8

35:1,1 48:8 49:3

49:14 50:17 53:17

60:6 66:17 68:8

69:5,8 71:22 72:1

72:18 79:1,22

83:7,11 94:13,17

95:6 103:19 115:6

132:12 133:5

149:1,20 150:5,12

175:8,8,13 180:8

185:19 186:1,19

188:9 191:22

203:2,4,8 204:17

214:17 215:2

229:18 233:17,22

234:4,7 235:3

236:5,11,14,21

247:1 248:17

249:21 255:7,14

263:21 272:7

283:13 284:5

286:20 295:7,11

300:18 315:4

339:12 340:10

359:3 365:11

367:6 375:18

walk-ins 5:13 6:9

20:14 21:22,22

22:2 24:11 27:11

28:10 38:3 41:10

59:8 62:10 72:5

113:18 114:8

115:4 116:6 209:9

226:17 227:1

237:18 263:15,17

265:15,22 271:4,5

271:7 272:13,13

277:9,11 281:12

281:14 283:10,12

283:20 286:9

288:12 289:9

291:4 293:15

295:8,18 296:5,10

297:3,9 298:19

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 429

299:15 300:5

333:2,21 361:11

381:12,21

walk-through

373:2,16

wall 44:16 62:19

76:19 82:7,18,18

82:20 83:2 84:7

88:3 121:21

122:21 154:18

155:1 292:3

334:17

walls 44:15 300:18

328:15 371:12

375:5

want 13:10 17:16

18:19 24:17 28:10

28:12 38:15 60:13

60:22 61:2 64:21

75:4 81:15 82:7

82:10 83:7 85:11

90:3,17,21 91:12

92:10 94:10,11

96:22 99:6 102:15

103:6,8 112:16

117:12,16 120:7

130:22 131:5

148:7 150:18

159:11 166:9

174:1 193:16

219:4 221:19

226:7 237:22

238:6 262:7

271:11 292:11

302:21 303:7

307:11 311:20

312:13 317:17

320:10 325:9

340:18 346:15

347:9 357:2,5

358:22 364:1

369:20 375:8,13

380:21 383:1,3

wanted 4:11 15:13

15:13 17:17 65:18

73:17 79:20 80:1

89:16 96:7 108:17

112:1 157:1

172:12 173:20

200:4 241:17

260:13 261:4

326:3 344:4

361:11 372:11

wanting 69:13

308:10

wants 23:21 118:6

261:6

warehouse 184:6

warehouses 62:4

112:21

warm 209:11

warrant 242:5

warranty 231:6

283:8

Warren 1:16 7:16

90:2 92:18 93:1,2

93:8,12,13 100:1

100:2,10 101:15

164:12,13 221:7,8

237:22 238:1

239:6

Washington 1:9

wasn't 91:3 98:3,5

98:6 244:11

260:17 364:12

waste 95:10,12

watch 121:19

122:13

watt 135:2,5

watts 134:20

135:10,11,20

way 11:8,12 38:13

41:11 44:11 49:6

61:2 73:8 74:7

77:14,17 86:5

95:22 113:20

120:12 148:9

162:15 164:14

165:9 168:1 172:3

177:12 181:1

221:19 224:20

234:1 239:8 242:9

249:4 250:5 251:7

251:18 253:12

259:3,15 266:14

282:3 284:12

292:18 312:8

314:11,22 322:7

324:11,22 325:19

327:10 328:9

332:11,13 333:2

338:4 340:7 342:3

342:5 346:21

349:11,13 352:4

355:6,16 362:4

363:14 369:11,11

374:12 376:21

382:16

ways 39:13 190:13

194:7 233:13

248:14 357:6

362:9

wear 129:8 177:7

Weber 2:15 7:8,8

website 12:10

156:10,17 184:7

376:19 377:16

379:2

Wednesday 1:7

4:10

week 18:3,11,12

142:11 284:8

293:11,11

weekends 213:19

weigh 33:13

weight 112:16

140:16

weighted 70:13

198:13 214:3

249:6 257:4 340:7

weighting 112:18

199:19

welcome 3:2 4:4,12

4:13,16,22 5:3

16:4 17:12 138:16

143:20 146:17

193:4 237:15

243:9 244:9

267:12 276:11

278:16 289:16

293:3

went 26:12 61:15

62:1 90:16 116:3

124:17 145:12

163:14 169:12

192:16 194:1

274:16 294:20,21

378:14 383:9

weren't 102:18

we'll 5:6 9:9,12,15

9:21 10:7 11:12

15:11,15 27:22

32:11 34:17 36:1

61:9,17 64:13

65:7 70:16 80:14

80:16 81:3 82:6

89:12 97:4 104:8

116:8 129:2,3,16

140:17 160:5

166:17 167:3,5

176:21 177:2,20

187:20 193:7

202:4 220:18

222:14 239:20

250:14 255:19

256:21 261:21

294:12 309:3

311:2,7 321:7

375:19

we're 14:1 18:17

20:6,12 21:13

27:11 32:19,22

33:1,2,5,12 35:22

36:5,22 38:11,14

41:2,10 43:6

45:20 57:11 59:4

61:11 65:9,11,19

78:19 79:10 82:15

83:21 108:8

109:15,17 112:7

115:22 122:7

123:9 125:17

126:1,10 127:16

129:5 130:1 135:5

135:6 145:1,2

150:15 151:21

163:13 164:7

172:22 173:8,13

173:13 176:10,19

179:10 188:11

200:17 211:7

212:11 218:9

220:9 223:14

233:20 234:5

242:4,7,18 244:16

254:17 255:17

260:10 263:10,15

264:6,14 269:16

272:6 277:2,8,17

279:7 280:14

282:14 284:1

286:5 287:20

290:6 291:16

292:2,16 294:6,14

294:16 295:1,2,3

297:3 300:20

305:6,21 307:14

307:17 308:12

310:8 313:7 317:5

319:11,13 320:16

322:6,10 323:16

323:19 324:3,10

325:12,18 326:4

327:15,18 328:3

331:10 332:1,2,3

332:4,6,8,13,15

333:2 335:12

337:16 338:1

342:5,6,11,13,15

342:17,22 343:11

344:11 345:22

346:12,17,20,21

348:3 351:16,17

354:20 355:17,21

355:21,22 365:15

365:16 368:3

369:21 370:3

372:13 378:8

379:8,17

we've 13:12 14:11

14:11 18:8,10

21:10 27:9,14

34:11 35:21 67:10

85:20 119:10

121:18 129:17

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 430

138:14 149:11

150:10 153:10

162:15,22 166:22

167:6 170:11

191:11 221:22

228:3 255:6

274:13,13 290:9

292:10 295:10

303:8 314:5 323:6

325:11 330:1

332:20 342:7,14

342:15,16 353:21

380:17

whatever's 114:19

whatsoever 370:2

what’s 257:15

wheels 332:8

whichever 173:6

whip 214:18

white 82:3 205:20

wholesale 284:15

wholesaler 231:1

285:6

wholesalers 183:14

who've 328:20

Widder 2:15 8:11

8:11

wide 73:2 117:1

widely 347:22

wiling 362:9

willing 249:20

363:19 371:20

wind 44:16 84:11

window 78:7,22

328:14 331:1

356:11,16 370:12

370:14

windows 47:6

50:22 53:13,15

62:18 88:20 328:6

331:3 334:21

371:12

Winiarski 2:16

200:1,2,3 221:21

222:11 223:1

258:19,21 259:11

261:4,5 262:18,21

271:12,14,16,17

272:17 292:4

winter 301:10

wiper 373:6,12,16

374:2

wish 5:8 11:22

254:20 320:21

376:4

wishes 9:5

withdraw 337:4

withstands 44:16

wonderful 293:5

wondering 70:8

171:16 192:8

202:7 270:20

wood 367:1,22

word 88:4 295:21

work 11:11 12:17

18:20 30:21 51:7

66:10 87:2 116:7

122:15 152:22

153:2 159:20

165:17 170:15

175:18 214:21

232:16 246:12

259:14 291:11

327:15 329:22

331:2 347:2

worked 153:6

213:13

working 58:4

133:21 229:9

330:1 331:3 379:8

382:15

workman-like

51:11,12

works 38:1 164:10

world 58:6 114:12

114:20 115:10

195:11 230:19

292:19

worms 82:12

worried 252:11

worry 90:22 290:11

290:12

worth 26:5 234:16

272:14 288:19

299:7 304:2 334:4

worthwhile 368:8

wouldn't 26:15

95:19 112:11

221:16 230:8

268:20 293:14

319:20 322:19

368:5,7

wrap 240:6

writing 18:5

357:15

written 62:17

103:13 144:13

146:18 148:11

293:3 331:14

340:20 360:19

363:13

wrong 153:3

269:13

X

X 108:3,3 156:13

217:12 224:10

258:1

Y

yards 177:12

yeah 116:8 133:3

137:18 152:15

year 14:4,21,22

49:13 62:1,4

69:19 167:5

191:19 224:15,16

250:4 252:9,11

254:9 257:7 261:9

263:3 264:16

266:8 274:10,15

276:19 277:10,13

278:4 285:2

288:11 289:7

290:15 295:13

297:10,14 302:14

302:15 305:16

310:4 312:7

336:19 339:4

346:14 354:21,21

355:22 379:12

years 13:12,12

14:11,18 15:1

31:14 35:12,15

57:12 193:18,21

194:3 209:5

230:14 231:5,11

234:11 235:22

239:22 241:8

248:21 264:21

274:14 277:15

283:12,19 286:9

286:21 287:2,16

288:16,21 289:10

289:18 290:8

291:5,6,15 325:11

330:2 346:4

yellow 199:2

yesterday 10:18

20:14 75:22

379:20

York 249:10

Z

zero 170:10,13

302:20 303:13,16

303:18

$

$20 14:1

0

0 251:7,7

0.45 207:13,16

0.5 208:12

0.54 302:14

0.9 151:22 207:13

207:14

08 364:7

09 156:18

09A 364:7

1

1 35:2,10,13 55:9

62:1 289:1,13

1,000 222:21

1,200 208:4 229:18

1,500 222:21

1-1 37:3

1.07 197:21 198:18

198:20

1.12 197:4

1.39 140:7

1.41 198:15 199:7

199:20

1.45 196:19,21

198:19

1.56 198:20

1.6 289:7

1.83 198:15 199:10

1:15 177:2,20 178:1

1:20 178:21

10 12:16 100:6

108:3 114:12

117:18 312:4

363:5 369:6,7

10k 139:21

10,000 207:22

216:15,15,17,17

220:20 255:18,19

10:45 9:16

100 15:8 151:12

177:12 230:20

317:20 322:11

339:12

100,000 277:12

1000 1:9

101 320:20

102,000 191:18

103 351:1 357:10

104 357:8

105 375:9,12

106 375:9,14

109 65:5

11 14:4 120:1

11:00 129:2

11:25 129:4,16

110 80:8

12 114:7,12 123:2

152:3 154:13

201:6 203:17

204:3 212:19,19

215:18,18 222:7,9

360:10,10,16

361:1

12,000 114:16

216:21 229:22

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 431

12:15 176:19 177:2

177:21

12:30 9:22

12:45 9:22

120 37:19

120,000 217:16

1250 23:15,19

24:14 27:7 136:6

137:1 204:18

210:18 211:18

213:3,14

1250-2009 75:9

212:1

13 162:12 305:13

1303 365:16 369:21

1303-08 364:18

1303-09 369:13

1303-09A 364:16

1363 358:16 359:2

359:8 362:1 366:2

138 3:6

15 12:16 129:3

143:10 220:21

239:22 250:3

268:21 274:1

282:20 283:19

15,000 114:16

116:19 221:4

16 162:7,13 211:3,7

211:7 212:8,16,20

212:22 215:17,19

239:22 360:10,10

360:17,17 361:1

16,000 224:14

225:3

18 283:12 364:10

1800 14:21

19 1:7 4:10

193 3:8

1975 132:16

1993 289:14

1997 289:14

2

2 295:13

2,010,000 280:8

2.2R 27:19 138:1

2.4 119:11

2.5 119:11

2.6 119:12

20 20:5 27:10 49:14

49:16 50:4,8

54:13 57:12 61:20

62:9,11,14 100:6

126:2 143:10

194:5 219:9

221:14 230:14

231:11 277:15

360:4,17 381:11

20,000 175:11,13

175:16,18 219:16

219:20

2005 354:15

2007 150:3,6

169:17 266:8

280:7 289:15

354:17,17

2008 61:22,22

202:10,13

2009 35:6 55:10

2010 1:7 4:10 35:8

2011 35:9 36:3

2012 35:2,10,14

36:3

2015 35:13 126:4

2035 307:5

21 87:20

22 87:20

23 89:22

24 15:10 50:5,6

54:13 61:21 62:3

122:7 208:17

211:8 214:15

360:3

24,000 230:1

24-hour 208:7

24/7 80:9

25 31:14 108:3

137:3,4,5 339:9

26 122:8

27 339:9

28 19:8 383:3

28th 16:6 164:3

166:10,14

283 372:2

288,000 191:17

29 19:8

3

3 11:7 67:5 298:6

305:15

3,000 59:22 111:5,8

111:10,21 113:12

113:20 114:5

3.2.8 191:18 269:9

270:3

3.9 156:13

3:05 294:21

3:15 294:13,19,22

30 3:3 19:8,22

108:3 219:9,22

235:22 242:5

252:19 264:21

268:16 275:3,18

330:1

30,000 175:12,18

30-some-odd

268:11

30-year 304:12

305:14

300-cubic 207:21

308 3:9

31 275:16

312 169:17

32 274:14 292:12

33 125:20 222:8

35 130:4 133:4

134:15 221:15

364 3:12,13

38 286:9

382 3:14

4

4 3:2 11:7 360:6,6

360:22 369:1,2

4.1 37:7

4:46:19 383:10

40 15:10 133:5

286:9 312:6

42 304:18

43 14:11

45 18:9 176:20

196:22 286:9

294:7

45,000 221:5

46 269:11,21

275:14,17

5

5 35:8 191:15

5,000 114:17

116:20 220:18

265:11

5.2 370:12,14

50 47:20 60:1

500 112:5

51 200:18

518 57:6

54 275:12,14

55 369:6

59 232:3

6

6 35:6 251:19,19

308:16,16

6,000 220:1 224:16

6.9 156:13

60 15:5 133:14

339:11

64 3:5

65 27:5

7

7 203:15 298:5

308:16

7,000 220:19

70 15:8 80:9 218:11

252:9,20 275:2

360:4

75 40:2 369:4

78 278:21

8

8 14:4 108:3 234:14

312:4 360:6,22

362:20,20 369:1,2

8E-089 1:9

8s 360:6

8,000 220:1 225:4

8-20 260:21

8.3.2 261:2

80 79:8 190:14

201:7 220:10

311:15

85 14:22

861 235:12,20

89 13:17

9

9,000 220:20

9:00 1:10

9:02 4:2

90 151:22 152:4

153:20 154:2

170:12

90.1 63:22 259:14

95 230:14

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44
I

:.

a

ti

(242) 234-4433 rvww.nealrgross.com

432

CERTIFICATE

This is to cerEify Ehat. the foregoing Lranscripc

in Lhe matter of: Enerqv Conservation Standards

Before: DougLas Brookman

M a y 1 9 , 2 0 1 0

PIACE:

! s P ! s - s r r L - r r r s

aforement ioned

l-1/^a\^,r11- i n^

F r r ' l l r n A a n m n l o t - o n r n n a a r l i n r r c n f r h o

n^ l- l- Fr e q renort- cd and reduced to

NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W,

wASHtNGTON, D.C. 20005-3701

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0015 COMMENT 44