1 UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Office ofEnergy Efficiency andRenewable Energy

PUBLIC HEARING ON ENERGY EFFICIENCY STANDARDS

Forrestal Building 1000 Independence Avenue, SW Washington, D.C. 20585 Thursday, June 5, 1997 9:30 a.m. U.S. Department ofEnerqy STEPHENWALDER MARY BETH ZIMMERMAN STEPHEN TURCHEN JEANBOULIN MICHAELMcCABE RONMAJETTE BOB MACKIE Office of Codes and Standards FR1NCINE PINTO Office of the General Counsel Attendees BOB GROBERG Department ofHousing andUrban Development BERT KALISCH JIM RANFONE TED WILLIAMS American Gas Association DEANBROCKBANK 

# QRIB

# INAL AndersonWindows B.J. KUMAR Energetics CHUCKFOSTER EEl EXECUTIVE COURT REPORTERS, INC. (301) 565-00642 AGENDA AGENDA ITEM: PAGE: I. Purpose of the Hearing 3 II. Welcoming Remarks and Introductions 9 III. Opening Statements 10 IV. Topics 16 V. Closing Remarks 21 VI. Adjournment 21

EXECUTIVE COURT REPORTERS, INC. (301) 565-00643 1 PROCEEDINGS 2 9:30 a.m. 3 I. Purpose of the Hearing 4 MR. WALDER: Goodmorning. I am Stephen 5 Walder, TeamLeader for the Federal Residential Energy 6 Efficiency Code Program, in the Office of Codes and 7 Standards. 8 Our teamofpeople at the head table consist 9 of Jean Boulin and Stephen Turchen fromthe Office of 10 Codes and Standards, Ms. Francine Pinto from the Office 11 of General Counsel, andMs. Mary Beth Zimmerman from 12 the Policy Office. 13 Onbehalf of the Department ofEnergy, I 14 would like to thank all ofyou for taking the time to 15 participate in this public hearing. 16 The purpose of this hearing is to get 17 stakeholder feedback on the issues proposedby the 18 department in theNotice of Proposed Rulemaking for the 19 Federal Residential EnergyEfficiency Code, NOPR, 20 published onMay 2nd, 1997. 21 The department sent a letter of invitation on 22 March

-- on

-- excuse me

-- May 7th to all interested 23 parties that have previously expressed interest inpast 24 federal residential activities. Anyone attending 25 today’s hearing or anyone who submitted comments will EXECtYIVE COURT REPORTERS, INC. (301) 565-00644 1 be added to ourmailing list for future mailings. 2 The comments receivedhere today, those 3 submittedduring the written coment period, and any 4 comments received as a result of today’s hearing will 5 assist the department in guiding its department

-- its 6 development

-- excuse me

-- ofthe federal rule for the 7 Federal Residential EnergyEfficiency Code. 8 I will be the presiding officer and 9 facilitator for this hearing. In addition, I will be 10 setting the guidelines for conducting the hearing and 11 providing otherpertinent information. 12 In approximately two weeks, a complete copy 13 ofthe transcript will be available for inspection and 14 copying at the Department ofEnergy’s Freedomof 15 InformationReading room, located in Room 1E-l90. 16 Anyone wishing to purchase a copy ofthe transcriptmay 17 make arrangements with the court reporter. 18 To allow greaterparticipation, today’s 19 public hearing deviates frompast approaches as 20 described in the May 2nd, 1997, Notice of Proposed 21 Rule. Instead, the agenda will be structured in a 22 topic—by-topic format, and all interestedparties will 23 be given the opportunity to be heard at today’s 24 hearing. 25 The departmenthas reviewed the topics raised EXECU’rIVE COURT REPORTERS, INC. (301) 565-00645 1 in statements by the scheduled speaker andbelieves a 2 topic-to-topic format would adhere to the process 3 improvement rule concerning open communications and 4 dialogues. 5 The department also believes this approach 6 wouldprompt greaterparticipation from interested 7 persons, and to encourage themto provide the 8 department with as muchpertinent information andviews 9 as canbe reasonably obtained on the featured topic. 10 The department will introduce the topic. 11 Next, the department will invite the scheduled speaker 12 to briefly summarize the keypoint ofhis prepared 13 statement. 14 The department may askquestions after each 15 statement and at otherpoints during the discussion. 16 The panel will be asking questions of the commenters. 17 The panel will allow commenters to askquestions of 18 each other in order to encourage open discussion among 19 the public. 20 At the end of all scheduled statements on 21 each topic, the department will invite participants to 22 comment on the statementsjust presented and/orpresent 23 her orhis view on that topic. 24 After discussion on a topic is completed, 25 eachparticipant will be permitted to briefly clarify EXECUTIVE COURT REPORTERS, INC. (301) 565-00646 1 her or his statement and comment on statements made by 2 others. 3 When all agenda topics have been discussed, 4 the department will invite participants to comment on 5 other remaining items pertinent to this rule. 6 Next, the presiding officerwill present 7 closing remarks. Afterward, the audience will be S invited to fill out an evaluation formbefore the 9 public hearing adjourns. 10 Are there any questions from the audience at 11 this point? 12 (No response) 13 MR. WALDER: We’ll take an hour lunchbreak 14 at a convenient time near 12 noon, which is onyour 15 own. There is a snackbarone floorbelow us. There 16 is the DOE cafeteria on the second floor of the West 17 Building, and a number ofrestaurants in the 18 UndergroundMall at L’Enfant Plazaup the street. 19 In addition, a 15-minute breakwill be taken 20 at a convenient time. 21 The hearing will be expedited, andwe will be 22 assured of obtaining eachparticipant’s views ifanyone 23 who wishes to speakwaits to be recognized. Please 24 remember to speak into the microphones, especially 25 those in the audience, and state yourname andyour EXECUTIVE COURT REPORTERS, INC. (301) 565-00647 1 companyname each time before you speak for the court 2 reporter. 3 Side conversations shouldbe kept at a 4 minimumto avoid interrupting the presenter. If a 5 lengthyprivate discussion is needed, please move to a 6 corner of the roomor out of the room. 7 It maybe necessary to cut off the debate of 8 some topics to maintain the schedule. There maybe 9 time at the endofthe hearing for additional 10 discussion of significant issues. 11 I encourage all persons present to 12 participate as much as possible so that the department 13 may get a full spectrumof opinions on these topics. 14 This hearing is scheduled to endby 5:00 p.m. 15 or sooner, if all items have been completely discussed. 16 Topics whichhave not been completely discussedby 5 17 p.m. canbe addressed in additional written comments. 18 The deadline for additional written comments is July 19 14th, 1997. July. The deadline for additional written 20 comments is July 14th, 1997. 21 All written comments and data submissions 22 will be available forpublic inspection at the DOE 23 Freedomof InformationReading Room. The phone number 24 is (202) 586-6020. 25 Written comments shouldbe addressed to the EXECUTIVE COURT REPORTERS, INC. (301) 565-00648 1 Department ofEnergy as noted in the Federal Register 2 notices for today’s hearing. 10 copies of the comments 3 and data are requested. 4 In addition, the department would appreciate 5 an electronic copy of the comments or data. The 6 department is using Word Perfect 6.1. No faxed 7 comments will be accepted. 8 Anypersons submitting informationwhichhe 9 or she believes to be confidential and exempt by law 10 frompublic disclosure should submit one complete copy 11 and 10 copies fromwhich information claimed to be 12 confidential has been deleted. 13 In accordance with the procedures established 14 at 10 CFR 1004.11, the Department ofEnergy will make 15 its own determinations as to whether the information 16 shall be exempt frompublic disclosure. 17 Inkeeping with the regulations for these 18 facilities, there is no smoking allowed in this room or 19 building. The restrooms are down the hall to your left 20 or right. Phones are located in the main lobby area. 21 Again, we appreciate the time and effort you 22 have taken inpreparing for this hearing and are 23 pleased to receive your comments and opinions. 24 I would like to reiterate the purpose of this 25 hearing is to listen to yourviews pertaining to the EXECUTIVE COURT REPORTERS, INC. (301) 565-00649 1 issues proposedby the department in the Notice of 2 ProposedRulemaking for the Federal Residential Energy 3 Efficiency Code. 4 I would ask ifyou have not signed inyet, to 5 please do so in the sign-in table

-- at the sign-in 6 table. 7 At this time, I would like to begin the 8 introductions, and thenwe’ll review the agenda. 9 II. Welcoming Remarks and Introductions 10 MR. WALDER: Our first

-- I’ll go around the 11 table andhave the panel here introduce themselves to 12 you. Start with MaryBeth. 13 MS. ZIMMERMAN: MaryBeth Zimmerman, Policy 14 Office. 15 MR. TURCHEN: StephenTurchen with the Office 16 of Codes and Standards. 17 MS. PINTO: Francine Pinto, the Office of 18 General Counsel. 19 MR. BOULIN: Jean Boulin, Office of Codes and 20 Standards. 21 MR. MAJETTE: RonMajette, Office of Codes 22 and Standards. 23 MR. WALDER: I’d like to go around the room, 24 andwouldyou introduce yourself, andplease state your 25 company or organization? Starting withyou, sir. EXECUTIVE COURT REPORTERS, INC. (301) 565-006410 1 MR. RANFONE: JimRanfone, Building Codes and 2 Standards, the American Gas Association. 3 MR. WILLIAMS: TedWilliams withAmerican Gas 4 Association. 5 MR. GROBERG: I’mBob Groberg with the 6 Department ofHousing andUrbanDevelopment. 7 MR. McCABE: Michael McCabe with the 8 Department ofEnergy’s Office of Codes and Standards. 9 MR. BROCKBANK: My name’s DeanBrockbank, and 10 I’mhere representingAndersonWindows. 11 MR. KALISCH: I’mBert Kalisch. I’mwith the 12 American Gas Association. 13 MR. KIJMAR: B.J. Kumar withEnergetics. 14 MR. MACKIE: Bob Mackie, Department of 15 Energy, Office of Codes and Standards. 16 MR. WALDER: I’d like to present our only 17 scheduled speaker today, andMr. James Ranfone from 18 American Gas Association, ifyou’d like to present your 19 discussion, sir. 20 III. Opening Statements 21 MR. RANFONE: Yes. My name is JimRanfone 22 with the American Gas Association, and as a 23 clarification, Mr. Walder, I appreciate first the 24 opportunity to speak, but as I understoodyour 25 introduction, you were going to not take statements. EXECUTIVE COURT REPORTERS, INC. (301) 565-006411 1 You were going to do it by issues or did I mis2 understand something? 3 MR. WALDER: We are going to take your 4 statement, and thenwere going to open the discussion 5 amongst the participants. 6 MR. RANFONE: Thankyouvery much. 7 I have aprepared statement. Withme today 8 is TedWilliams. He’s the Manager of Industry 9 Standards forAmericanGas Association, andBert 10 Icalisch, who is in our Government Relations Office. 11 The American Gas Association is a non-profit 12 trade associationrepresenting over 200 local natural 13 gas distribution companies in the United States, which 14 together distribute more than 90 percent of the natural 15 gas delivered in this country. 16 These companies deliver gas energy fromthe 17 welihead to the burner tip and serve nearly 58 million 18 customers. 19 Ourmembers are affectedby the energy 20 efficiency issues that are regulatedbyDOE. This 21 proposed rule establishes minimumenergybuilding 22 standards for new federal residential buildings, 23 including single-family andmulti-family low-rise 24 housing. 25 Since the proposedrule would cover all EXECUTIVE COURT REPORTERS, INC. (301) 565-006412 1 aspects ofresidential building thermal envelopes as 2 well as space- andwater-heating systems, ventilation 3 and air conditioning systems design, radon and indoor 4 airpollutants, members ofAGAwill be significantly 5 affectedby this action. 6 In 1992, Congress passed the Energy Policy 7 Act directing the Department ofEnergy to establishby 8 rule federal building energy standards. The new energy 9 standards, however, must be technologically feasible 10 and economicallyjustified. 11 DOE developed the technical support document, 12 “An Economic Analysis andEnvironmental Assessment”, to 13 justify the proposed standards. AlthoughAGA continues 14 to reviewDOE’s support document, we are here today to 15 express our concern with some ofthe measures that have 16 been identified to date. 17 On the energy efficiency comments, price 18 escalation factor, the document uses the National 19 Institute of Standards andTechnology orNIST real fuel 20 price escalation factors through 2020, which are broken 21 into four regions. 22 The escalation factors for all fuels are 23 consideredhigher thanwhat DOE andAGA are forecasting 24 through 2015. 25 Of greater concern to AGA is the NIST EXECUTIVE COURT REPORTERS, INC. (301) 565-006413 1 forecast showing gas increasing at a higher rate than 2 AGA andDOE estimates. DOE shoulduse its ownnumbers 3 when forecasting, and there is a chart which is 4 provided as part ofour comments that illustrate the 5 difference in the fuel price escalation rates. 6 On the blended fuel cost, AGA opposes the use 7 ofblended fuel costs in the life cycle cost analysis. 8 Since Congress directedDOE to promulgate rules that 9 are cost effective, use of ablended fuel cost master 10 price mask the price advantage of less-expensive fuels. 11 According to DOE, this is the 1996 numbers, 12 natural gas prices permillionbtus is about $6.12 and 13 are much lower than electricityprices at $24.35 per 14 millionbtus, andblending themwould disadvantage gas, 15 particularly if inter-fuel comparisons are used. 16 The secondpart ofour comments deal with 17 other issues, other than the energy issues. 18 First is backdrafting requirements. AGA is 19 concerned about the backdrafting test requirement 20 proposedunder Section 435.503.5.9.1. 21 The methodology andtesting forbackdrafting 22 has been and continues to be a challenging technical 23 issue, andbefore proceeding to adopt the Canadian test 24 method forbackdrafting testing, DOE should solicit 25 input or seekpeerreview fromthe U.S. scientific EXECUTIVE COURT REPORTERS, INC. (301) 565-006414 1 community. 2 It is the position ofAGAthat safety is an 3 issue second to none. Fromthe extraction, 4 transmission and delivery ofnatural gas to its enduse 5 by the appliance, safety is the paramount concern of 6 ourmembers. 7 However, DOE shouldnot move forwardwith 8 promulgating rules on indoor airpollutants in reliance 9 upon one standard ormethodology, especially when the 10 U.s. scientific community questions the application of 11 that methodology in the mannerproposedbyDOE. 12 As DOE is probably aware, there’s on-going 13 research in the U.S. aimed at developing national 14 consensus standards forbackdrafting testing 15 procedures. While there is a continuing technical 16 debate over the efficacy and interpretation ofthe 17 spillage test cited in the proposedrule, Canadian 18 Standard 51.75-95, neither this standardnor its 19 underlying test procedures has been adopted in the U.S. 20 through a consensus process. 21 AGAwould strongly cautionDOE against 22 adopting such a standard at this time, and certainly in 23 view of the on-going technical debate over such tests. 24 AGAwill provide a complete discussion ofthis issue as 25 part of ourwritten comments on the proposedrule. EXECUTIVE COURTREPORTERS, INC. (301) 565-006416 1 Otherprovisions. It is the position ofAGA 2 that the last line of Section 435.503.5.9 shouldbe 3 deleted. To ourknowledge, there is no standard for 4 determining the gas appliance equipment’s 5 depressurization limit, and that’s what wouldbe 6 required in that provision. Adoption of this provision 7 would cause considerable confusion and is 8 unenforceable. 9 AGA’s concernedthat the proposed language in 10 Section 435.504.3 is confusing. That sectionmaybe 11 interpreted as precluding combination systems, such as 12 natural gas waterheaters, though designed to provide 13 both domestic hot water and space heating. AGA is not 14 aware of the technical basis for these provisions. 15 Therefore, it is the position ofAGA that theybe 16 deleted. 17 There are otherprovisions andproposed 18 revisions in Sections 435.504 to .507 that deal with 19 additional requirements for appliance controls and 20 other systemrequirements that shouldnot be part of an 21 energy conservation standard. Therefore, it is the 22 position ofAGA that they also be deleted. 23 In conclusion, AGAwill provide its full set 24 of comments to DOEby the July 14th deadline, and ask 25 DOE to address the issues raisedby this statement and EXECUTIVE COURT REPORTERS, INC. (301) 565-006416 1 our subsequent written comments. 2 AGAurges DOE to make appropriate changes in 3 the proposed rule consistent with the comments to 4 ensure that the new efficiency

-- Energy Efficiency 5 Code forNew Federal Residential Buildings is 6 consistent with the energy efficiency environmental 7 goals ofEPACT as well as its own existing regulatory 8 scheme. 9 I’dbe happy to answer any questions or try 10 to answer any questions youhave at this time. 11 IV. Topics 12 MR. WALDER: Are there any questions that the 13 panel would like to address to Mr. Ranfone? 14 (No response) 15 MR. WALDER: Thankyou foryour statements, 16 sir. 17 MR. RANFONE: I do have one other

-- Jim 18 Ranfone, American Gas Association. One question for 19 the panel or forDOE. 20 Is the technical support document that was 21 made available, is that

-- is that going to be 22 finalized? It noted that it was a draft. 23 And the secondpart of the question is, who 24 is the author of the technical support document? Is it 25 a DOE-generated document? EXECUTIVE COURT REPORTERS, INC. (301) 565-006417 1 MR. WALDER: It’s a DOE-generated document, 2 and it will be finalized during the development of the 3 final residential standard. So, it’s not final, so to 4 speak. 5 MR. RANFONE: JimRanfone, AGA. Then it 6 couldbe changedprior to its final iteration? 7 MR. WALDER: Oh, certainly. 8 MR. RANFONE: Thankyou. 9 MR. BOULIN: Mr. Ranfone, whenyouprovide 10 your additional more detailed comments, I would 11 appreciate particularly some informationon quite how 12 the blending would disadvantage gas whenyou get to 13 that part. 14 Also, I wouldbe interested inunderstanding 15 who youbelieve in the scientific community questions 16 the methodologythat we areproposing, just in case we 17 don’t have all the information onhand. 18 Similarly, ifyou can advise us ofthe on19 going researchwhichyou are aware of, just so that we 20 don’t miss things along the road, that will help us 21 within the process and to expedite getting this

-- this 22 material out. 23 On the otherprovisions that you’re talking 24 about onyour thirdpage ofyour testimonywe have in 25 front ofus, you talkabout the way the provision is EXECtTIVE COURT REPORTERS, INC. (301) 565-006418 1 written is confusing. 2 I understandthat you are

-- you have some

-- 3 some otherproblems with it, but ifyou could comment 4 to us onhow that might be

-- be worded to avoid 5 confusion that you find in the actual wording portion 6 ofthat, that wouldbe of some help to us in our 7 deliberations. 8 I guess, finally, I wouldhope inyour

-- 9 your comments to us, yourwritten comments to us, that 10 in the otherproposedprovisions there that deal with 11 additional requirements on appliance controls and other 12 systemrequirements, ifyou could explain to us why 13 they shouldn’t be included, and, of course, identify 14 those explicitly. 15 Thankyou. 16 MR. RANFONE: JimRanfone, AGA. We certainly 17 will do that in ourwritten comments. 18 MR. WALDER: Thankyou again, sir. 19 Yes, sir? 20 MR. TURCHEN: Steve Turchen, Department of 21 Energy. A couple of additional questions for Jim 22 Ranfone. 23 Jim, in the discussion ofprice escalation 24 factors inyourwritten comments, will it be possible 25 to provide more data or information about how the AGA EXECUTIVE COURT REPORTERS, INC. (301) 565-006419 1 escalation rates were determined? 2 MR. RANFONE: JimRanfone. Yes, we will be 3 able to provide that. 4 MR. TURCHEN: Okay. Also, as kind of a 5 follow-up question to JeanBoulin’s onbackdrafting, do 6 you know of any consensus standardgroup that’s 7 currently working on developing aU.S. standard for 8 backdrafting tests oryoumentioned

-- you alluded to 9 some research that’s going on. 10 I’mquestioning whether there’s actual 11 committee workrelated to developing such a standard. 12 MR. RANFONE: JimRanfone, AGA. There is an 13 American Society of Testing Materials orASTM group 14 that is putting together

-- reviewing all ofthe test 15 methodologies forbackdrafting, and that wouldbe under 16 national consensus process. I don’t have the number of 17 that particular committee, but it is an on-going 18 activity, and they are considering the Canadian 19 standard. 20 MR. TURCHEN: So, at the present time, 21 they’re reviewing the current work on

-- on 22 backdrafting? 23 MR. RANFONE: They’re reviewing the current 24 existing

-- JimRanfone, AGA,

-- the current existing 25 methodologies that are out there as well as the EXECUTIVE COURT REPORTERS, INC. (301) 565-006420 1 research that’s underway inbackdrafting. 2 MR. TURCHEN: Okay. One final question of 3 clarification. Jim, inyour

-- under Other Provisions, 4 you make reference to 435.504 to .507. I believe you 5 reallymean 435.504.5 through .7, is that

-- 6 MR. RANFONE: Yes. I guess instead of the 7 hyphen, it shouldhave been through. Those are the

-- 8 those are the sections we’re concerned about. 504.5, 9 504.6 and 504.7. We don’t believe they are energy10 related. 11 MR. TURCHEN: And then on the issue of 12 blended fuel costs, ifthe department were to go with 13 the promulgation of the rule that wouldbe fuel14 specific, wouldyoube able inyour comments to provide 15 some

-- at leastAGA’s opinion onhow such a rule would 16 be

-- how the proposal wouldbe presented? 17 MR. RANFONE: JimRanfone, AGA. We will be 18 glad to do that. There are existing orhave been 19 existing methodologies in the past that didn’t use fuel 20 blending, came up with separate envelope

-- thermal 21 envelope requirements, depending onyour source, and 22 that was the approach that we had taken. 23 MR. TURCHEN: Thankyou. 24 MR. WALDER: Are there any other speakers or 25 questions on the topics that were discussed here today? EXECUTIVE COURTREPORTERS, INC. (301) 565-006421 1 Price escalation factor inputs, blended fuel costs, 2 backdrafting requirements, and otherprovisions of the 3 rule. 4 (No response) 5 MR. WALDER: No other comments or speakers? 6 (No response) 7 V. Closing Remarks 8 MR. WALDER: Okay. I’d like to present my 9 closing remarks. 10 I appreciate the attendance and the time that 11 you gentlemenhave taken to attend this hearing, and we 12 will provide our responses to these comments and any 13 others that we get betweennow and July 14th. 14 Thankyou for attending again, and I adjourn 15 this meeting. 16 (Whereupon, the public hearing was 17 adjourned.) 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 EXECUTIVE COURT REPORTERS, INC. (301) 565-0064•1 2 REPORTERS CERTIFICATE

3 This is to certify that the attached 4 proceedings before: DEPT. OF ENERGY 5 6 7 In the Matterof: CODES AND STANDARDS

8 9 10 11 12 were held as herein appears and that this is the 13 original transcript thereoffor the file ofthe 14 Department, Commission, AdministrativeLawJudge 15 or the Agency. 16 (F

20 Dated: JUNE 5, 1997 

# ç

EXECUTIVECOURTREPORTERS (301

## ) 565—0064