# EXHIBIT D

Case 1:13-cv-01555-GK Document 13-6 Filed 10/31/13 Page 1 of 8IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

AMERICAN LUNG ASSOCIATION, et al. Plaintiffs,
and HEARTH, PATIO & BARBECUE ASSOCIATION, Proposed Plaintiff-Intervenors,

v. GINA MCCARTHY, in her official capacity as Administrator, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Defendant. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) No. 13-cv-1555 (GK)

DECLARATION OF FRANK L. MOORE I, Frank L. Moore, declare under penalty of perjury as follows: 1. I am the President and Co-Owner of Hardy Manufactur ing Company, Inc. (“Hardy”). I make this Declaration based on my per sonal knowledge in support of the Hearth, Patio & Barbecue Association’s (“HPBA”) Motion to I ntervene as a Plaintiff in this litigation.
2. Hardy is a member of HPBA. Hardy was the first man ufacturer of outdoor woodfired hydronic heaters (“OWHHs”), and it remains th e leading manufacturer of such products. Hardy began selling OWHHs in 1980, and it received a patent for its OWHH technology in 1982. OWHHs are Hardy’s primary product offering.
3. I have served as President of Hardy since 1989. In that capacity, I am familiar with the nature and activities of Hardy regarding t he production and sales of outdoor wood-fired hydronic heaters. An engineer by trade, I have con tinually been involved in developing new Case 1:13-cv-01555-GK Document 13-6 Filed 10/31/13 Page 2 of 82

outdoor heating products, including testing materia ls, exploring new concepts, and monitoring technological advances.
4. In addition to serving as the President of Hardy, I was the chairman of HPBA’s OWHH Caucus for several years during the early 2000 s. I also served as the original chair of an ASTM International subcommittee tasked with develop ing a test protocol for OWHHs.
5. For many years, HPBA’s OWHH Caucus has urged EPA to establish new source performance standards for OWHHs under Section 111 o f the Clean Air Act. Specifically, in September 2007, HPBA’s OWHH Caucus sent a letter to EPA indicating that its members, including Hardy, would unanimously support such an effort by EPA. A copy of that letter is attached hereto as Attachment A. In that letter, t he Caucus provided several reasons for supporting such standards. In particular, the Cauc us emphasized the need for nationally uniform standards that apply to OWHHs. In the absence of u niform EPA standards, OWHH manufacturers and purchasers have, at times, faced local bans on OWHHs. OWHH manufacturers also must comply with numerous state regulations ( e.g. , in New England states, New York, Pennsylvania, Maryland, and Indiana) that establish differing requirements, including in some cases the need to obtain state-level certif ications, that add delays and costs to efforts to commercialize products. Many of these regulations were promulgated in the past several years, and could potentially have been avoided if uniform national standards had been in existence.
6. Moreover, additional state rules could be issued in the future in an effort to continue filling the void left by the lack of EPA s tandards. As an example, the Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation recently p roposed regulations to establish state emission standards for new wood stoves and other wo od heating devices within the Fairbanks North Star Borough. The need to participate in sta te and local proceedings for the adoption of Case 1:13-cv-01555-GK Document 13-6 Filed 10/31/13 Page 3 of 83

these rules, in order to attempt to achieve nationa l uniformity of standards, also implicates additional costs. In addition to the risk of new s tates and local jurisdictions entering the fray, there is also a risk that the states that have alre ady regulated outdoor OWHHs could go back to the well and try to impose more stringent standards

. 7. Uniform national standards are important for Hardy in making decisions to invest in capital equipment, develop new products, and mak e long range planning decisions. Lack of uniformity would make it very inefficient and costl y for Hardy to do business.
8. The uncertainty regarding the timing and nature of EPA regulations has also had a substantial negative impact on Hardy’s business. I have already pointed out that lack of knowledge about the stringency of new standards and their compliance dates has understandably inhibited planning and investments and developing n ew products. In addition, Hardy’s sales have gone down by approximately 60% in recent years , which has cost the company several millions of dollars. Although much of this downtur n in sales is attributable to economic conditions generally and the much higher costs of n ew models that have been developed to meet state regulatory requirements, I believe that it is also attributable to the hesitance of Hardy’s customers to buy OWHHs before EPA puts uniform stan dards in place. While any new standards would not be expected to be applied to ap pliances that are sold before the passage of the standards, customers generally do not understan d this, and they are reluctant to spend significant amounts of money on a new product in th e face of regulatory uncertainty. Should EPA, however, move forward and establish clear, uni form standards, that will give customers in the marketplace the certainty they need to make pur chasing decisions. Case 1:13-cv-01555-GK Document 13-6 Filed 10/31/13 Page 4 of 84

I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoi ng is true and correct. Executed on October 31,
2013.

Frank L. Moore Case 1:13-cv-01555-GK Document 13-6 Filed 10/31/13 Page 5 of 8

# ATTACHMENT A

Case 1:13-cv-01555-GK Document 13-6 Filed 10/31/13 Page 6 of 8Case 1:13-cv-01555-GK Document 13-6 Filed 10/31/13 Page 7 of 8Case 1:13-cv-01555-GK Document 13-6 Filed 10/31/13 Page 8 of 8