EE-RWSTD-98-440 '73 M/M

Effect of ARI 210/240 and California Load Assumptions on

0.10 SEER 20

0.09 ------ -- . ---- - 18

0.08 -- _----a_--_ _ __ ___-- 16

§O SEER = 16.3

0.07 _14

L. 0.06-- I -- 1

Cu / / \ U\ u a 0 _ _

o 0.05--------- ------------------ LU

N 0.04 - --- / / - SEER 14.4 _ 8__

0.03 ___ -- __ ___ 6

Z m 0.02 -/-- -- __ _/~-ARI 210/240-94 Load 41

02- .R _ Sacramento, CA Load .

U 2-speed EER _

0.01 -0 ___ / _ ._ --- < 0.01 ..... -- ------------------- 2--- 2

0.00 o 0

65-69 70-74 75-79 80-84 85-89 90-94 95-99 100-104 ^

Outdoor Temperature Bins (degrees F) i i.

MB&U

tl /t /OO

I EE-RM-STD-98-440 COMMENT 73MM

s::: 

0 .-..., 

(,) 

~ U-

"'C 

cu 

0 

..J 

"'C 

Q) 

N .--

cu 

E 

~ 

0 

Z 

EE-RM/STD-98-440 

Effect of ARI 210/240 and California Load Assumptions on 

0.1 0 -r--__ "'=r== __ --,-__ ----r __ .-:..::E=rE=.::...::R=--_~--~--_..,...--___, 20 

0.09 II _---1 ___ 111 __ -

0.08 --

SEER = 16.3 

0.07 -

0.06 ~--- -------

0.05 -

0.04 --

0.03 --

0.02 -- --

-11-- 18 

------ 16 

14 

II 

t--- - --------.. ------- 11------ 12 

II 

0::: 

10 W· 

W 

8 

6 

2 

0.00 -...----0111~__+_---+---_+----+-----+---_+_---!__--~ 0 

65-69 70-74 75-79 80-84 85-89 90-94 

Outdoor Temperature Bins (degrees F) 

95-99 100-104 

MBI-l 

pc;...~ -/ 

I. l /tr-loa 
EE-RM/STD- 98-440 - 3 - /14 ,

SEER12 - EER Distribution

70 -

60-

cn(50-

40- .

. 30

E

2 0

10 10.2 10.4 10.6 10.8 11 112 11.4 11.6 11.8

EER

Ivl P ' m

.. EE-RM-STD-98-440 COMMENT 73MM

EE .. RM/STD .. 98-440._ #--73 -!\1M , 

SEER 12 - EER Distribution 

70-~-------------------------------------------. 

60-'----------------------------------------------------~ 

en 50 -/---------------

.f.oJ 

C 

2 40 

o 

'-

~ 30 -1-------------

E 

::J 

Z 20 -1-------

10-1-----

o -+---~ 

10 10.2 10.4 10.6 10.8 11 11.2 11.4 11.6 11.8 

EER 

~I~J-l 

PGJ-~ -' Z 

II/I{./OO 
EE-RM/S"TD-98440o73-- M

SEER13 - EER Distribution

18 -i

16

14

12 -

z 6 _ __

4-

10 10.3 10.6 10.9 11.2 11.5 11.8 12.1 12.4 12.7

EER

PG£-3

./ b/OO

EE-RM-STD-98-440 COMMENT 73MM

EE-RM/STD-98-440~;t::-'l3·-tv.. M 

SEER13 - EER Distribution 

18 

16 

14 -

en 12 ~ .-

c 

::J 

'+- 10 - 0 

'-

Q) 8- oC 

E· 

:::J 

z 6 

4 

2 

0 

10 10.3 10.6 10.9 11.2 11.5 11.8 12.1 12.4 12.7 

EER 
EE-RM/STD-98-440 7 -/A/ M

Relationship Between SEER and EERA (95°F)

Air-source Split System Air Conditioners Under 65,000 Btuh Total Cooling Capacity

20

A Single Speed

18 ---- M Two Speed

u 14l .

12 - A

A AA

"'° '14 _- _"-_. A X

8

8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

EERA (95°F)

Met

PGtE _j

, //oO

Davis Energy Group, Inc 11/15/2000

EE-RM-STD-98-440 COMMENT 73MM

EE-RM/STO-98-44o--j: 1~-M M . 

Relationship Between SEER and EERA (95°F) 

Air-source Split System Air Conditioners Under 65,000 Btuh Total Cooling Capacity 

20 

18 

16 

IX: Itl 14 

en 

12 

10 

8 

8 

A Single Speed 

II Two Speed 

II 

- -- -

...... t6: ,at A :ti"U 'AA t ,A ..... -_. ._--------

9 

Davis Energy Group, Inc 

I-

- - .. - - -- II 

II 

II 

II A~A 

.. .lie ... ~~.~A 

- .-. 'Z-ZII ~A*i A A. A 

tt~~,tal I "At.6. 'AA AAA 

~ A A 

,; ... A A 

---------, 1'---

A A 

t 

A 

AIAAA 

•• A A 

... 

10 11 12 

-

II 

a 

~ 

A 

13 

A .. 

-

14 15 

MBH 

PGtE ~Lf 

11/'''/00 

11/15/2000 
EE-RM/ST-r98440 ,73r/m

Effect of Outdoor Temperature on EER

14.0

SEER

- >. .-- .132W/TXV

" ^ sI I --- 14 wTXV

1'"~~ 3.0^~~ s _____~ - - 12w/oTXV

12.0 -- g - ---- ^ 0 '^------------ 13 , w/oTXV

"-^^^, '^ - 1 w/oTXV i\ _--14 

12.0 .

180 85 90 95 100 105 110

Outdoor Dry Bulb Temperature (deg F)

.~.

10.0 5 1

Outdoor Dry Bulb Temperature (deg F)

hWLk

P6^~-^

11//(./0

.. EE-RM-STD-98-440 COMMENT 73MM

EE-RM/STD-98_440 -#~-!Yl1Y\ 

Effect of Outdoor Temperature on EER 

14.0 

t 11.0 

en 

-rt 

w 

w 10.0 

~ SEER 

...... 12w/TXV 

--. 

~ ~ 

........ - - '13w/TXV 

-. 14w/TXV 

• ,.. 12w/oTXV -. r-.... ~ 

~ --..-. 

r-~ -0- '13 w/o TXV 

• 14 w/o TXV 

.. ....... "-~ "" .. ~ ~ ......... ~ ... 

... ......... 

~ ~-.~ ~:-.-. .. -. .. .. ~ .. .. "" .. .. .. .. ,....... -. .. .. .......... . .. .. ... .. .. .. .. .. E 

~ -''''' .. ~ .. .. .. '" ....... .. .. .. ....... ~ ..... ~~ .. .. .. .. ~'~ ....... .. .. .. .. .. .. . ........ . .. .. .. "1~ 

13.0 

12.0 

9.0 

8.0 .. .. .. ~~ 

7.0 

80 85 90 95 100 105 110 

Outdoor Dry Bulb Temperature (deg F) 

M '0t-1 

PG t~ ~<t 

Il/"./OO 
EE-RM/STD-98-44 --0 ,t/ -lMM

Effect of Outdoor Temperature on Demand

(36,000 Btuh cooling output)

5.0

4.5 o

el _r

4.0 ] .

80 85__________ 90__________ 95 10__ 0101

el I

? 3.5 --- ^^ --- ^ ^ ^ j<<- ' -- ^ - ^r-------

E ' ''"^^^ ^- < ^^^ ^ - "^ ' ^^G^^ SEER

3.0 12W' -

^- - '13w/TXV

14W/TXV

- 4- 12w/oTXV

2.5 - - *13w/oTXV

*-- 14 w/o TXV

2.0 q

80 85 90 95 100 105 110

Outdoor Dry Bulb Temperature (deg F)

II'CI c ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ P70

el-I~I~~w TTP,/o

tli &H

Pd, 4 b'a

. . EE-RM-STD-98-440 COMMENT 73MM

~ -

EE-RM/STD-9800440_#-'f3 ·-M M . 

Effect of Outdoor Temperature on Demand 

(36,000 Btuh cooling output) 

5.0?---------~-----------.----------~----------~----------~--------_. 

4.5~----------4_----------~----------~----------_+--~~----~----------~ 

4.0~----------~------------4--------.. ~ .. --~------~~~~~~~~--~----------~ 

.. .. .. .. '" "" - "" 

.. .. .. .. 

.. ~ ca 3.5~------~~~----------~~~~~~~~------~~--~~--------~~----------~ ... 

~ 

3.0~---4~----_+----~~~~~~--------~----------~ 

2.5~-----------+------------4-----------~----------~ 

SEER 

• 12 wfTXV 

- • '13wfTXV 

14wfTXV 

- .- 12 w/o TXV 

--0.. '13 w/o TXV 

• 14w/oTXV 

2.0~----------~----------~----------~--------~~--------~----------~ 

80 85 90 95 100 

Outdoor Dry Bulb Temperature (deg F) 

105 110 

(nBH 

PG.JE-5 

f l/,,, /00 
'SheNew Dork 'imes

OCT 3 2000

Circ: 1,187, 95O EE-RM/STD-98044 7 950MM.

New Efficiency Standards

Proposed forAppliances

Effort Will Save Fuel but Raise Some Costs

By MATTHEW L. WALD

WASHINGTON, Oct. 2 - Central Unlike the air-conditioner rule, the

air-conditioning and heat pumps washer rule is a consensus proposal

would have to do the same amount of of the manufacturers and environwork on 20 percent to 30 percent less mental groups.

electricity under standards that will

be proposed on Tuesday by the Energy Department.

Mr. Richardson said the depart- ptlalHT g

ment was "on a rush to establisn an 9e•4uC"_145

environmental and energy self-suffi- , 

H-D

ciency legacy."

The standards would add $274 to

the price of central new air-concitioners, an increase of about 12 per- tAANDAif&

cent, and $486 to the price of new itAAv- 141

heat pumps, an increase of about 13 o K5uMEt

percent, me department said.

The clothes washer standard

would add as much as U240 to the cost

of a washer, doubling the price of a

ottom-o-f-le-leine model_

At heAirConditioning and Re- The water heater proposal, pubfrigeration Institute, a trade group lished in April, would add $68 to the

here, Edward W. Dooley, a spokes- cost of an electric water heater and

man, said that if efficiency require- $45 to a gas model...

ments pushed prices too high, some The lighting rule, published in final

people would not be able to afford to form last month, will add $7 to the

buy the appliances, minimum cost of a ballast, the major

component of a fluorescent fixture

besides the tube itself.

EE-RM-STD-98-440 COMMENT 73MM

i'E~eNe\U lJork ~'m.~~. 3 2000 . OCT 

Clrc: 1,187,950 EE-RM/STD-98-440." #:'73 -A1 M. 

New Efficiency Standards 

Proposed for Appliances 

EHort Will Save Fuel but Raise Some Costs 

ttl ... \ :).. 

f' By MATTHEW L. WALD .. • .. 

WASHINGTON, Oct. 2 - Central 

air-conditioning . and heat pumps 

would have to do the same amount of 

work on 20 percent to 30 percent less 

electricity under standards that will 

be proposed on Tuesday by the EneTDepartment 

Unlike the air-conditioner rule, the 

washer rule is a consensus proposal 

of the manufacturers and environmental groups. 

Mr. Richardson said the department was Han a rush to establisn an 

environmental and energy self-sufficiency legacy." 

e • -- The standards would add $274 to 

the price of central new" air-conclitioners, an increase of abOut 12 percent, and $486 to the price of new 

eat pumps, E..1, increase of about 13 

reent, tne department said . 

The clothes • washer • • standard 

would add as much as ~240- to the cost 

of a washer, doUbling the price of a 

. e-line 1 

Air and Refrigeration Institute, a trade group 

here, Edward W. Dooley, a spokesman, said that if efficiency requirements pushed prices too high, some 

people would not be able to afford to 

buy the appliances. 

The water proposal, published in April, would add $68 to the 

cost of an electric water heater and 

$45 to a gas model ••. 

The lighting rule, published in final 

form last month, will add $7 to the 

minimum cost of a ballast, the major 

component of a fluorescent fixture 

besides the tube itself. 

fJ\ANDA1tS 

HAVE- H\tcH 

L0-5"--S To c..o~ '$ vME."RS 
EE-RM/STD-8s-44o- - Mm .

Monday, June 12, 2000

Copyright © Las Vegas Review-Journal

First it was toilets and now it's

washing machines

By Ben Lieberman

Special to the ReviewJoumnalThe federal government thinks your clothes washer is contributing to

global warming and it's going-to make you do something about it.

If the justification for these supposedly eco-fiendlyappliances is so wea If the justification for these supposedly eco-friendly appliances is so weak,

then who is supporting DOE's rule? Not consumers. Those who prefer front

loaders are free to go out and buy them.

"It is distressing to see' the federal government treating the consumer

preference for top loaders as an obstacle to be overcome through mandates,"says Fran Smith, executive director of Consumer Alert, a

Washington-based consumer group.

Energy efficiency standards can only be explained by special-interest

politics. The proposed washing machine standard is supported by a coalition

of DOE bureaucrats and federally funded advocacy groups who make their

living from the efficiency game. Ironically, the process of creating an

appliance efficiency standard is itself a marvel of inefficiency, requiring 34

discrete bureaucratic steps unfolding over the span of several years. Useful or

not, this exercise keeps a lot of Washington paper pushers employed.

Several appliance manufacturers also support DOE'S new rule, which will

give them a guaranteed market for pricey front loaders that would otherwise

remain slow sellers. Producers admit they.won't have to worry about. -

A ] consumer satistaction with front loaders, since the public would no [onet ] C ON.JF l r

''C

' have a choice. A spokesman for one manufacturer conceded that "selling it in

the marketplace is easy if there's a standard in place. It's not a matter., L t.N I'. L-'

necessarily, of consumer acceptance."

The era of big government is definitely not over, but the era of top loading

washing machines -- and freedom of choice -- apparently is.

Ben Lieberman (benl@cei.org) is a policy analyst with the Competitive

Enterprise Institute, in Washington, D.C.

This story is located at: http://www.lvri.com/lvrj home/2000/Jun-12-Mon2000/opinion/13741545.html

For comment or questions, please email webmasterlvri.com

Copyright © Las Vegas Review-Journal, 1997 - 2000

EE-RM-STD-98-440 COMMENT 73MM

* 

EE.RM/STD.9~O~1F'b~ MM . 

. .... .1 I" . 

~onday,June12,2000 

Copyright © Las Vegas Review-Journal" 

First it was toilets and now it's" . wa.shing machines I 

By BeD Lieberman 

Special to the Revie'W"IolU1larThe federal gdVernmentthinks your clothes washer is contributing to . 

global warming and itrsguing"tomake you do something about it 

• • •• If the justification for these supposedly eco-friendly appliances is so weak, 

then who is supporting DOErs rule? Notconsumers. Those who prefer front 

loaders are freeto go out: and.buy them .. 

nIt is. distressing to. see' the federal" government tre~ting the consumer 

preference for top loaders as an obstacle to he overcome through . 

ma.Tldates,lIsays Fran Smith, executive director of Consumer Alert, a 

W~.3hington-based consumer group. 

Energy efficiency standards can only be explained by special-interest 

politics. The proposed washing machine standard is supported by a coalition 

of DOE bureaucrats and federally funded advocacy groups who make their 

living from the efficiency game. Ironically, the process of creating an 

appliance e:f;liciency standard is itself a marvel of inefficiency, reqUiring 34 

discrete bureaucmtic steps unfolding over the span of several years. Useful or 

not, this exercise keeps a lot of Washington paper pushers employed. 

. C 6N$VME~S . 

~~~~~~~~~~~~~tl~NOR[D 

The era of big government is defmitely not over, but the em of top loading 

washing machines -- and freedom of choice -- apparently is. 

Ben Lieberman (ben1@cei.org) is a policy analyst with the Competitive. 

Enterprise Institute, in Washington, D.C.' . 

" This story is located at: http://www.lvrj.com/lvrj home/2000/Jun-12-Mon-

. 2000/opinionl13741545.html 

For comment or questions, please email webmastet@lvrj.com 

Copyright © Las Vegas Review-Journal, 1997 - 2000 
EE-RM/STD-98-440 .4i1- >MN

A Load of... Regulation

irst they drained the water from our toilets, leaving us with daily

reminders of Washington's regulatory excess . Now they're going

after our washing machines.

The Clinton administration has wrested a promise from appliance

makers to improve washer efficiency by reducing the energy

"it ! required to run a load. This massive redesign will cost tens of

pi 14 * millions of dollars, which will increase the price of a new machine

I S " by $100 or more. Likely more, as government cost projecions rarely

prove accurate.

Meanwhile, the White House is proposing a tax credit for

appliance manufacturers who exceed the efficiency targets - adding

further to the financial burden on families.

In theory, more efficient washers will consume less natural gas or

electricity, thereby reducing emissions of carbon dioxide and other

so-called greenhouse gases implicated in global warming. But the

government targets - to be phased in by 2007 - will only cut

carbon dioxide emissions by .7 percent annually, or0 average - too

little to make a whit of difference to the environment.

Moreover, consumers will be left with fewer model choices.

Meeting the new sandards requres elimination ot te agtatorat the

| LE' 1 /heart of top-loaders, which are now used in 95 percent of American

C VOtW ! households. Manufacturing emphasis will instead turn to the more

A's'flcAi0fr costly, less convenient front-loaders.

And a load of laundry will take some 10 minutes longer to wash.

A 1987 law, the National Appliance Energy Conservation Act,

authorized the Department of Energy (DOE) to impose efficiency

standards with the intent of reducing American dependence on

foreign oil. But the statute has since been hijacked by the Clinton

administration for purposes of implementing the Kyoto Treaty on

global warming - a treaty too environmentally extreme to win

Senate ratification.

The fact is, washer efficiency has been consistently improving as

technology advances. And the same, if not greater efficiency

improvements, would likely occur as households simply replace

older machines. That becomes less likely, however, as the cost of

washers increases.

A slew of other appliances also are within DOE's regulatory

sights, including heat pumps, air conditioners, furnaces, refrigerators

sights, including heat pumps, air conditioners, furnaces, refrigerators

and water heaters. Another phase of proposed efficiency standards is

expected next spring.

One might have hoped for a household regulatory reprieve after

the indignity of the 1992 toilet fiasco, in which Washington

restricted toilet water to 1.6 gallons per flush - too meager a flow

to properly void the bowl. But nothing is off limits for a government

intent on controlling every aspect o- our lives.

The Issue:

Are energy efficiency standards necessary for home appliance?

EE-RM-STD-98-440 COMMENT 73MM

EE-RM/STD-98-44041?>- I\~ Nt . -A-Lo'ad of ... Regulation 

, irst they drained the water from our toilets, leaving us with daily 

--rern:nders of Washington's regulatory excess. Now they're going 

after our washing machines. 

The Clinton administration has wrested a promise from appliance 

makers to improve washer efficiency by reducing the energy 

d required to run a ioad. This massive redesign will cost tens of 

t11f:{ n millions of dollars, which will increase the rice of a new machine U??1 by $100 or more. Likely more, as governmen cos proJec Ions rare y 

prove accurate. 

Meanwhile, the White House is proposing a tax credit for 

appliance manufacturers who exceed the efficiency targets - adding 

further to the financial burden on families. 

In theory, more efficient washers will consume less natural gas or 

electricity, thereby reducing emissions of carbon dioxide and other 

so-called greenhouse gases implicated in global warming. But the 

government targets - to be phased in by 2007 - will only cut 

carbon dioxide emissions by. 7 percent annually, OF average - too 

little to make a whit of difference to the environment. 

~ Moreover, consumers will be left with fewer model choices. 

"-~-E;-~-6--L.-"'Meeting the new standards reqUITes ehmmahon of the agItator' at the 

",,"-.IIIII!~ heart of top-loaders, which are now used in 95 percent of American CD~7l1f"''''''' households. Manufacturing emphasis will instead turn to the more 

--SA1"~fAcTiDN costly, less conveni~nt front-loaders. 

And a load of laundry will take some 10 minutes longer to wash. 

A 1987 law, the National Appliance Energy Conservation Act, 

authorized the Department of Energy (DOE) to impose efficiency 

standards with the intent of reducing American dependence on 

foreign oil. But the statute has since been hijacked by the Clinton 

administration for purposes of implementing the Kyoto Treaty on 

global warming - a treaty too environmentally extreme to win 

Senate ratification. 

The fact is, washer efficiency has been consistently improving as 

technology advances. And the same, if not greater efficiency 

improvements, would likely occur as households simply replace 

older machines. That becomes less likely, however, as the cost of 

washers increases. 

A slew of other appliances also are within DOE's regulatory 

sights, including heat pumps, air conditioners, furnaces, refrigerators 

sights, including heat pumps, air conditioners, furnaces, refrigerators 

and water heaters. Another phase of proposed efficiency standards is 

expected next spring. 

One might have hoped for a household regulatory reprieve after 

the indignity of the 1992 toilet fiasco, in which Washington 

restricted toilet water to 1.6 gallons per flush - too meager a flow 

to properly void the bowl. But nothing is off limits for a government 

~ntent on controlling every aspect of our avesj 

The Issue: 

Are energy efficiency standards necessary for home appliance? 
E I£NS I[lEASE EE-RLsTD s8 44 - .I/SW -

·Ca"ct~c .. Robin Skiles

Robin Rf SilesernmawhlrpDoi corn

WHIRLPOOL CORPORATION APPLAUDS DOE'S PUBUCATION

.OF NEW, HIGHER REFRIGERATOR ENERGY STANDARDS

.. .* .

BENTON HARBOR, Mich. -April 23, 1997- Whirlpool Corporaion

(NYSE: WHR) said today it commends the U.S. Department for Energy (DOE)

for formally releasing new energy-efficiency standards for refrigerators and

freezers sold in the U.S. 'The standards, which were sent to the Federal Register

today for publication, become effective July , 2001.,

According to DOE, the new energy rules will reduce by up to 30 percent

the energy used by the typical home refrigerator. Ex reductions in

electricity consumption as a result of the higher standards should save

consumers more than $2 bllion and the country about 37 million barrels of oil

over the ifetime of refrigerators sold in the U.S. each year..

'Whirlpool has worked'long and hard--alongside environmental, energy- . conservation and utility groups and state energy offices-to help make these

new refrigerator standards a reality,' said William D. Marohn, Vice Chairman,

Whirlpool Corporation. The technology required to reach greater efficiency is

proven, and we owe it to consumers, the environment and the country to make it

available while maintaining a competitive marketplace."

A4DA'T [- ,Marohn said that federal standards provide the only meaninaful route to

kA. INS'T 'i :appropriately higher energy efficiency for appliancesbecause consumers have

pgoLF-'5 r historically shown a disinclination to p more for products hatare more .

WIlL- L ' envlrmtal ndl.J ru he sa even en thetotal wn

and operating such products isless than that of currant models.

. Whirlpool Corporation is the word's leading manufacturr and marketer of

major home appliances. Headquartered in Benton Harbor. the company

manufactures In 13 countries and markets products under 11 major brand names

In about 140 countries.

*' '':".~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ' * '. . . .

e~in oAl, Auiwsrircv r.Bla en> H*bx. i MidcAkiLJAn 49C

EE-RM-STD-98-440 COMMENT 73MM

.. 

EE~RM/STD:9~~o-=#:,1!> ~~;v..M, . .~ . 

, .. (".oIlrace ' , , . Robin Skiles 

. '.' 616J923-2456 

B.~b~n..R .. SkilesOemailwblrJpoOl.com 

. . '. 

WJiIRLPOOL CORPORATION APPlAUD$ .DOE'S PUBUc;AnON- .. OF NEW.,iiIGHER REFRIGERATOR ENERGY STANDARDS _ 

BENTON HAA,BOR, 'Mich. - April 23, .,99r~ ~jrtPooJ Corporation 

(NYSE: WH~) said ':Oday, it c~mmends' the ,U.S. Departmen~ for Energy (DOE) 

for fonnally releasing new energy..efliciency standards for refrigerators and 

f..eezer~ ,sold in the U.S. 'Tl:Je standards, Which were a~ to the Federal ~gister - • 

tod~y for pu~lication~ become effective j.~ -1 t 2001." '- ' , 

According to DOE. the new energy rules wDl reduce by "p to 30 percent ' , 

th~ energy 'used by the tYpJcafhc~e refrige~tor. ~ ~uctions In 

erectricity consumption as.8 result of the higher standards Should save . 

Consumers more than $2 bmion and the coun~ about 37 million barrels. of oil ' 

over the Dfetime of refrigerators sold in the U.S. eaCh yea,.. " . . ~irlpQOJ has WOrked'long ~ncI'h~ong~e envfronmental, energy .. 

• con~efVation and utility groups and state energy offi~ h~p mak~-.~ese 

.. new refrigerator. standards a reallty,- said William,o. a.,arohn, vice 'Chairman. ' 

Whirlpool Corporati~n. "The technof~ required to ..each .g~ter efficiency is 

. proven. and we owe ,it to consumers. the environmant and the country to make it 

___ --.. ' . available while mai"taining~ a competitive -~arketplaCe.· . 

~AA1 DA1'f. - " Marohn ,aid that federal, standards erovide the 'only meanineful route to . , - - A.r:tkl NS -r . lPpropriate,y higher energY efficiency for applfances~causa CO!1Sumers ha~$ , 

PE:~t.£ '~ histOrically shawn a dlsinclinati~n to pay mare for products that are more r' . 

"'\1.-1- .~, . envlronm,ptally friendly, Jb8ts·., he ~id, eyen when Rle tota, sesl of eWing 

,nd openitins such prOducts is'less ,an that Of currant models. , . _ ' • 

, WhirlpooJ Corporati,on is the world's leading .manufacturer and marketer of 

major home apprlSncee. ' Headquartered in Benton Harbor. the campi!lny .' , 

manufactures In 13 CQuntrfes and markets prOducts under"1-"1 major brand names - . . .. - '..' 

In 8l?out 140 CDuntrfe~, 

". 

.".. 

~~ .~t. 
"a«CT-8®a . IRApttt^ o lKSlo, .

-NDON I-S RIDiCQLCS

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY ILL PlCtAPSo;N Fo R

PoE SPEND)6c TAXI$ oN

Imus in the Morning COoNTy// /3T-EieN CoNCE-,

SatIEs 1o LFo44rio

MSNBC TV, October 12, 2000, 7:27 \ VAA ,0/A p/ AQl /E AW)AIDE'

An Interview with Secretary of Energy Richardson - -

BROADCAST EXCERPT

MR. DON IMUS: Twenty-seven after the hour on the program. We just had a

commercial for East Coast Energy. And coincidentally, here with us now on the "Imus in

the Morning" program, the Secretary of Energy, Bill Richardson. Good morning, Mr.

Secretary.

SECRETARY OF ENERGY BILL RICHARDSON: Don, nice to be with you.

Thanks.

MR. IMUS: I'm going to talk with Secretary Richardson about these oil reserves,

releasing the strategic oil reserve, release of the strategic oil reserve here recently, and also

this -- there's some deal they've got going with Maytag washers, or what the hell is that all

about?

SEC. RICHARDSON: Well, what we're doing, Don, is as part of the Department

of Energy's --

MR. IMUS: A concert deal, or something, isn't it?

[Laughter.]

SEC. RICHARDSON: No. What we're doing is we're saying air-conditioning and

washing machine standards, we've got to improve their efficiency, their-energy efficiency.

O

EE-RM-STD-98-440 COMMENT 73MM

u.s. DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY 

Imus in the Morning 

MSNBC TV, October 12,2000, 7:27 

RADIo 1k-K 5fto~ ----

DoN IKUS RIDtc.v(...ss 

Ei\l~EJ'I S~ 

131l,..L. R.C.tl.ARPSoN f'cR 

poE spENDJ1J<=riAX,# oN 

cooNrfl.Y!"s.sre~N coNcEIeT S~tE' 10 FRfJM(f(£ 

¥/ASHIN~ HAcHINE. I'IMDIfrE 

An Interview with Secretary of Energy Richardson 

BROADCAST EXCERPT 

MR. DON !MUS: Twenty-seven after the hour on the program. We just had a 

commercial for East Coast Energy. And coincidentally, here with us now on the "Imus in 

the Morning" program, the Secretary of Energy, Bill Richardson. Good morning, Mr. 

Secretary. 

SECRETARY OF ENERGY BILL RICHARDSON: Don, nice to be with you. 

Thanks. 

• •• 

MR. IMUS: I'm going to talk with Secretary Richardson about these oil reserves, 

releasing the strategic oil reserve, release of the strategic oil reserve here recently, and also 

this -- there's some deal they've got going with Maytag washers, or what the hell is that all 

about? _-

SEC. RICHARDSON: Well, what we're doing, Don, is as part of the Department 

of Energy's --

MR. IMUS: A concert deal, or something, isn't it? 

[Laughter. ] 

SEC. RICHARDSON: No. What we're doing is we're saying air-conditioning and 

washing machine standards, we've got to improve their efficiency, their' energy efficiency. 

• • • 
EERIM/STD-O89Q -M,/ 4 l

AP J8479 re bpbp- BPI-COUNTRYPEOPLE-Country people (colum 09-27 12:56p)

Country People (column)

From the Entertainment News Wire

MUSIC AND MAYTAG: Country singers Kenny Chesney, Sara Evans and Jennifer Day

will combine for a six-city, free concert tour aimed at building conservation awareness.

Sponsored by Maytag Appliances and the Department of Energy, the Making Music

Matter tour starts Oct. 28 in Boston and continues to New York (Nov. 23), Phoenix (Jan. 2001),

Los Angeles (February), Chicago (March) and Washington, D.C. (April 22). The tour developed

out of a three-year partnership between Maytag and the DOE to determine the conservation

benefits of high-efficiency washers.

* |FA..AYER DoU-AIS Ap£PNT oM PR | 9

JFcoR ANDAE A AOA 1\15T1 Pope's W4i-L " ^ ________________________S

EE-RM-STD-98-440 COMMENT 73MM

AP J8479 re bpbp- BPI-COUNTRYPEOPLE-Country people (colum 09-27 12:56p) 

Country People (column) 

From the Entertainment News Wire 

MUSIC AND MA YTAG: Country singers Kenny Chesney, Sara Evans and Jennifer Day 

will combine for a six-city, free concert tour aimed at building conservation awareness . • Sponsored b~ Maytag Appliances and the Department of EDer~ the Making Music 

'Matter tour starts Oct. 28 in Boston and continues to New York (Nov. 23), Phoenix (Jan. 2001), 

Los Angeles (February), Chicago (March) and Washington, D.C. (April 22). The tour developed 

out of a three-year partnership between Maytag and the DOE to determine the conservation 

benefits of high-efficiency washers. , 

• 
MR. IMUS: Oh, no. I know you know that. EE-RM/ STD-98'440 - 1

SEC. RICHARDSON: But, no, you're right. I don't know about the concert.

Who's playing? Who's in it?

MR. IMUS: I was going to ask you that, see if you knew.

SEC. RICHARDSON: I have no idea.

MR. IMUS: Are you a country music fan?

SEC. RICHARDSON: Yeah. Yeah.

MR. IMUS: Have you ever heard of Kenny Chesney?

SEC. RICHARDSON: No.

MR. IMUS: Well, he's your star in this dopey tour.

SEC. RICHARDSON: Is he? Oh?

MR. IMUS: I mean, you know, not Vince Gill, not, you know, George Strait, not

Allen Jackson.

SEC. RICHARDSON: Not the big ones, huh?

MR. IMUS: Not even Dever (ph) McClinton. Kenny Chesney?

SEC. RICHARDSON: Are you going?

MR. IMUS: No, I'm not going to go. Nobody's going to go to this.

MR. McCORD: Oh, yeah, he's opening-for him.

[Laughter.]

MR. IMUS: Also features somebody by the name of Sarah Evans.

MR. McCORD: I've never heard of her.

MR. IMUS: She's going to sing. And Jennifer Day, she's going to sing.

MR. McCORD: I don't know who she is.

EE-RM-STD-98-440 COMMENT 73MM

MR. IMUS:dh,'no: I know you know that. EE-RM/STD-98-44o-#-1~··M/n. 

SEC. RICHARDSON: But, no, you're right. I don't know about the concert. 

Who'·s playing? Who's in it? 

MR. IMUS: I was going to ask you that, see if you knew. 

SEC. RICHARDSON: I have no idea. 

MR. IMUS: Are you a country music fan? 

SEC. RICHARDSON: Yeah. Yeah. 

MR. IMUS: Have you ever heard of Kenny Chesney? 

SEC. RICHARDSON: No .. 

MR. IMUS: Well, he's your star in this dopey tour. 

SEC. RICHARDSON: Is he? Oh? 

MR. IMUS: I mean, you know, not Vince Gill, not, you know, George Strait, not 

Allen Jackson. 

SEC. RICHARDSON: Not the big ones, huh? 

MR. IMUS: Not even Dever (ph) McClinton. Kenny Chesney? 

SEC. RICHARDSON: Are you going? 

MR. IMUS: No, I'm not going to go. Nobody's going to go to this. 

MR. McCORD: Oh, yeah, he's op~ng.for him. 

[Laughter. ] 

MR. !MUS: Also features somebody by the name of Sarah Evans. 

MR. McCORD: I've never heard of her. 

MR. !MUS: She's going to sing. And Jennifer Day, she's going to sing. 

MR. McCORD: I don't know who she is. 
i.;......... .. . EE-RM/STD98-/440.--7M-1t

You know, we can have the SUVs as long as they -- and we can make a more fuelefficient engine, 40 miles per gallon; energy-efficiency in buildings and homes; you know,

give people tax credits to have more energy-efficient homes, and your ranch in new

Mexico; give you a tax credit if you make it wind or solar. You won't freeze. It'll be

great. Find ways to give incentives so that our own domestic oil and gas people, or coal,

can grow here. We are too dependent on foreign oil.

* * *

MR. IMUS: It's ten minutes till the hour here on the "Imus in the Morning"

program. We're talking with Secretary of Energy Bill Richardson.

Now, this -- I got this -- this brochure here, I guess, this Maytag music matter. Do

you know anything about this?

SEC. RICHARDSON: Has that --

MR. IMUS: No, you don't, do you?

SEC. RICHARDSON: -- got to do with the Energy Department, or what?

MR. IMUS: Yes.

SEC. RICHARDSON: You know, with washing machines, we try to make them

more efficient.

MR. IMUS: I understand.

SEC. RICHARDSON: Is that what it is?

MR. IMUS: No, it's a -- here's what it is. It's a six city, free concert tour

sponsored by Maytag appliances and the Department of Energy.

SEC. RICHARDSON: Oh.

MR. IMUS: Oh? It says the purpose is to help build awareness about the need for

conservation and to educate consumers about what they can do.

* * -

MR. IMUS: Okay.

Secretary Richardson tells about this Maytag music matter concert tour that

Maytag and the Department of Energy is sponsoring. And Secretary Richardson doesn't

know anything about it.

SEC. RICHARDSON: Well, no, I know about Maytag's, about our efforts on

conservation.

EE-RM-STD-98-440 COMMENT 73MM

_ EE.RM/STD.98-440~#--75·-A11Jt 

You know, we can have the SUVs as long as they -- and we can make a more fuelefficient engine, 40 miles per gallon; energy-efficiency in buildings and homes; you know, 

give people tax credits to have more energy-efficient ~omes, and your ranch in new 

Mexico; give you a tax credit if you make it wind or solar. You won't freeze. It'll be 

great. Find ways to give incentives so that our own domestic oil and gas people, or coal, 

can grow here. Weare too dependent on foreign oil. 

• • • 

MR. IMUS: It's ten minutes till the hour here on the !lImus in the Morning" 

program. We're talking with Secretary of Energy Bill Richardson. 

Now, this -- I got this -- this brochure here, I guess, this Maytag music matter .. Do 

you know anything about this? 

SEC. RICHARDSON: Has that --

MR. IMUS: No, you don't, do you? 

SEC. RICHARDSON: -- got to do with the Energy Department, or what? 

MR. IMUS: Yes. 

SEC. RICHARDSON: You know, with washing machines, we try to make them 

more efficient. 

MR. IMUS: I understand. 

SEC. RICHARDSON: Is that what it is? 

MR. IMUS: No, it's a -- here's what it is. It's a six city, free concert tour 

sponsored by Maytag appliances and the' Department of Energy. 

SEC. RICHARDSON: Oh. 

MR. IMUS: Oh? It says the purpose is to help build awareness about the need for 

conservation and to educate consumers about what they can do . 

• • • 

:MR. IMUS: Okay. 

Secretary Richardson tells about this Maytag music matter concert tour that 

Maytag and the Department of Energy is sponsoring. And Secretary Richardson doesn't 

know anything about it. 

SEC. RICHARDSON: Well, no, I know about Maytag's, about our efforts on 

conservation. 
Maytag: About Maytag - News Bureau http://www.maytag.com:80/AboutMayt.. .J5S92GTF00 1 PQOMFMPDC 1VJA&newsid=36

n .s uEE-RM/STD .98-44 P LARS S PR 1

*w7 FoRl MANDATE AcAlN5T IEts WLL l

'e Boston Washer Study @

Maytag Appliances and U.S. Department of Energy Conduct Second Nationwide Conservation Program with the

new Maytag Neptune® High-Efficiency Washer

Chicago, IL (April 7, 2000) - Maytag Appliances is at it again, showing the nation the benefit of high-efficiency washers

such as the new Maytag Neptune washer. But this time, they're not just in Kansas anymore. In a strategic partnership with

the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE), Maytag will take over Reading, Mass., a suburb of Boston, to show consumers

how to save up to 40 percent of the water and 65 percent of the energy by simply doing their laundry the smart way - the

Maytag Neptune way.'

Boston Washer Study

Similar to a conservation program conducted in 1997 in Bern, Kansas, Maytag Appliances and the DOE are adopting

Reading to be part of the Energy Star Residential Technology program. Residents of the Summit Terrace apartment

complex will trade their current washers and dryers for the new Maytag Neptune laundry pair to measure the amount of

water and energy saved by using these high-efficiency washers. As in Kansas, the objective of the study is to demonstrate O

to consumers the dramatic savings seen when using high-efficiency appliances in the home.

"The Bern, Kansas study was a success in showing the remarkable impact of how high-efficiency washers, like the

Maytag Neptune, helped one of the most water-scarce towns on the map," states John Tomlinson, residential program

manager at the DOE's Oak Ridge National Laboratory.

"Boston, like Bern, experiences serious water quality and scarcity issues, which result in some of the highest water rates in)

the nation. We believe that taking this program to the East Coast will only increase public awareness of how highefficiency appliances can make a big difference."

According to the American Water Works Association, washing machines rank as one of the top three indoor water users

in the home, coupled with showers and toilets.2 The difference of saving nearly 40 percent of the water and 65 percent of

the energy with each use of this frequent water-user, is astounding.

And We're Off...

The conservation program is due to start next month. Beginning in May, the DOE (with the assistance of the Summit

Terrace residents) will measure the amount of water and energy used when doing laundry in a before-and-after

experiment. The initial months will measure levels with the residents' current washers. In early August, their existing

washers will be replaced with the new Maytag Neptune laundry pair and water and energy use will continue to be

measured throughout the fall. Final results will be reported in mid-October.

"We have to thank all of the residents of Summit Terrace who have enthusiastically rallied around this program," said

Lisa Buckley, vice president and general manager of Maytag Appliances, laundry category. "We are confident they will

love the outstanding cleaning, the conservation, the increased usable capacity, the customization features and the gentle'

care that the Maytag Neptune laundry pair provides. Further, they'll appreciate the savings on their utility bills equated

with using less water and energy - up to $100 per year!" 3

? For additional information on the Boston Washer Study, its details and timing, please call Meg Gorham at Leo Burnett PR

at 312/220-4700 or John Tomlinson at the DOE's Oak Ridge National Laboratory at 423/574-0291.

Compared to conventional top-load washers. Based on Department of Energy test method with average washer, 9 loads

per week, average water and sewer rates and 1998 electrical rates and dryer savings. Your savings will depend on

utility rates, model replaced and usage

2 AWWA's Water Conservation Book by William Maddaus ©1987 3 In comparison to an average conventional washer based on 9 loads per week, the new Maytag Neptune saves 6,971

gallons per year. This is compared to a figure in Robert Gardner's Water, in which he states that humans drink about

6,600 gallons of water in a lifetime.

EE-RM-STD-98-440 COMMENT 73MM

Maytag: About Maytag - News Bureau http://www.maytag.com:80/AboutMayt .. .J5S92GTFOOIPQOMFMPDCIVJA&ne~sid=36 

, 

• 

, 

• 

n:::I~=!!::~~~~* !;rA~~: [~~~N;~ ~~ , . he Boston Washer Study • 

May tag Appliances and U.S. Department of Energy Conduct Second Nationwide Conservation Program with the 

new Maytag Neptune@ High-Efficiency Washer 

Chicago, IL (April 7, 2000) - Maytag Appliances is at it again, showing the nation the benefit of high-efficiency washers 

such as the new Maytag Neptune washer. But this time, they're not just in Kansas anymore. In a strategic partnership with 

the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE), Maytag will take over Reading, Mass., a suburb of Boston, to show consumers • 

'how to save up to 40 percent of the water and 65 percent of the energy by simply doing their laundry the smart way - th~ 

Maytag Neptune way. 1 • 

• 

Boston Washer Study 

Similar to a conservation program conducted,in 1997 in Bern, Kansas,.Maytag Appliances and the DOE are adopting 

Reading to be part of the Energy Star Residential Technology program. Residents of the Summit Terrace apartment 

complex will trade their current washers and dryers for the new Maytag Neptune laundry pair to measure the amount of 

water and energy saved by using these high-efficiency washers. As in Kansas, the objective of the study is to demonstrat~PR to consumers the dramatic savings seen when using high-efficiency appliances in the home. - • • • 

"The Bern, Kansas study was a success in showing the remarkable impact of how high-efficiency washers, like the 

Maytag Neptune, helped one of the most water-scarce towns on the map," states John Tomlinson, residential program 

manager at the DOEis Oak Ridge National Laboratory. 

"Boston, like Bern, experiences serious water quality and scarcity issues, which result in some of the highest water rates in100 

the nation. We believe that taking this program to the East Coast will only increase public awareness of how high- J' J\ 

efficiency appliances can make a big difference." I 

According to the Am~rican Water Works Association, washing machines rank as one of the top three indoor water users 

in the home, coupled with showers and toilets.2 The difference of saving nearly 40 percent of the water and 65 percent of 

the energy with each use of this frequent water-user, is astounding. 

And We're Off ... 

The conservation program is due to start next month. Beginning in May, the DOE (with the assistance of the Summit 

Terrace residents) will measure the amount of water and energy used when doing laundry in a before-and-after 

experiment. The initial months will measure levels with the residents' current washers. In early August, their existing 

washers will be replaced with the new Maytag Neptune laund air and water and energy use will continue to be • 

measure roug out the all. Fmal results will be reported in mid-October. 

"We have to thank all of the residents of Summit Terrace who have enthusiastically rallied around this program," said 

Lisa Buckley, vice president and general manager of Maytag Appliances, laundry category. "We are confident they will 

love the outstanding cleaning, the conservation, the increased usable capacity, the customization features and the gentle· 

care that the Ma a Ne tune laundry air provides. Further, they'll appreciate the savings on their utility bills equated 

with using less water and energy - up to 00 per year! "3 

, For additional information on the Boston Washer Stud, its details and timin, lease call Me Gorham at Leo Burnett PR , 

• at 312 220-4700 or John Tomlinson at the DOE's Oak Ridge National Laboratory at 423/574-0291. • 

1 Compared to conventional top-load washers. Based on Department of Energy test method with average washer, 9 loads 

per week, average water and sewer rates and 1998 electrical rates and dryer savings. Your savings will depend on 

utility rates, model replaced and usage 

2 A WW A's Water Conservation Book by William Maddaus © 1987 

3 In comparison to an average conventional washer based on 9 loads per week, the new Maytag Neptune saves 6,971 

gallons per year. This is compared to a figure in Robert Gardner's Water, in which he states that humans drink about 

6,600 gallons of water in a lifetime. 
EE-RM/STD-98-440- '7 - A/ t

SEC. RICHARDSON: Well, the good thing about that, Don, is we're trying to

reach people. I mean one of the things about the Department of Energy --

MR. IMUS: You're going to reach 'em with these people?

[Laughter.]

SEC. RICHARDSON: Well, one of the things about the Department of Energy is

we need to talk to the American people better about conservation and getting out there

and saying "You know, you can save money if you are smarter about how you use energy.

Like, when you leave a room, shut the light off. Like, change your air-conditioning filter.

Like, find ways to, you know, bring the curtains in so you don't use as much energy, or

find ways that, with a washing machine, you don't wash your clothes at peak hours; you

do it at hours that the energy grid isn't so strained." You know, we try to communicate

that, and I think that's what's happening with that Maytag tour, which I guess I should find

out about.

[Laughter.]

MR. IMUS: Get you a ticket to the concert.

@ O0

[Laughter.]

MR. IMUS: It's great to see you again. Thank you very much.

SECRETARY RICHARDSON: Well, thank you.

MR. IMUS: Secretary Bill Richardson here on the "Imus in the Morning"

program.

[END OF INTERVIEW.]

EE-RM-STD-98-440 COMMENT 73MM

EE-RM/STD-98~440 __ It 1"3 -Mill. 

SEC. RICHARDSON: Well, the good thing about that, Don, is we're trying to 

reach people. I mean one of the things about the Department of Energy --

MR. !MUS: You're going to reach 'em with these people? 

[Laughter.] 

SEC. RICHARDSON: Well, one of the things about the Department of Energy is 

we need to talk to the American people better about conservation and getting out there 

and saying "You know, you can save money if you are smarter about how you use energy. 

Like, when you leave a room, shut the light off. Like, change your air-conditioning filter. 

Like, find ways to, you know, bring the curtains in so you don't use as much energy, or 

find ways that, with a washing machine, you don't wash your clothes at peak hours; you 

do it at hours that the energy grid isn't so strained." You know, we try to communicate 

that, and I think that's what's happening with that Maytag tour, which I guess I should find 

out about. 

[Laughter.] 

.MR. IMUS: Get you a ticket to the concert . 

• • • 

[Laughter. ] 

.MR. IMUS: It's great to see you again. Thank you very much. 

SECRETARY RICHARDSON: Well, thank you . 

.MR. IMUS: Secretary Bill Richardson here on the "Imus in the Morning" 

program. 

[END OF INTERVIEW.] 
Natiorial Policy Analysis #310: Eco...or and Minorities - September 2000 http://www.nationalcenter.org/NPA3 1O.html

EE-RM/STD-98-440 - 73- 1_/1

A Publication of The National Center for Public Policy Research

#310 September 2000

Economic Opportunity and Social Issues Trump Environment as Top

Concerns for Poor and Minorities

By John K. Carlisle P

r EfAltofRs OFPPLER,

D 5AIPAPS. APVES-5

lMePAc' OF i6.l0tlAio 1 ' Environmental laws are unfair to minorities and the poor because, although they are least able to pay

they must bear the greatest costs for adhering to those laws through lostjobs andhigher prices.

The time is long overdue for government to start considering the negative economic impact of proposed

environmental laws on impoverished minorities before implementation.

So concludes the results of a recent survey of 69 environmental justice groups conducted by the National

Center for Public Policy Research. These groups represent a diverse collection of African-American,

Hispanic and Native American activist organizations. These groups have also identified themselves, to

varying degrees, as concerned about environmental justice for minorities and the poor.

In 1994, President Bill Clinton attempted to establish an environmental justice policy by issuing an

executive order. That order required federal agencies to promote environmental justice for minorities

and the poor by ensuring that agency policies do not inflict additional environmental burdens on these

communities. The order stems from the belief that the poor and minorities suffer more environmental ills

than other Americans. 1

But, as the National Center survey discovered, this concept of environmental justice is woefully

inadequate. While not denying the need to ensure that minorities are not inflicted with excessive

environmental problems, the groups surveyed by the National Center understand true environmental

justice to include far more than just the natural environment but the social and economic environment as

well. The results of the survey suggest that true environmental justice, according to these groups, also

means taking into account the urgent need for economic improvement, better-paying jobs, educational

opportunity and access to better health care.

When asked, for instance, to rank their top public policy concern out of a list of six issues - education,

health care, racism, economic advancement, environmental progress and crime - only six percent of

environmental justice groups ranked the environment as their top priority. An overwhelming 91% of

respondents ranked education, health care, fighting racism and economic advancement as more

important than environmental issues.2

Likewise, 72% of environmental iustice groups disagreed with the idea that low-income communities

should be deprived of jobs, higher incomes and other economic opportunities if that is necessary to

enforce environmental laws and regulations. This concern for balancing economic issues with

environmental concerns was reflected throughout the survey. For example, 57% of surveyed groups said

that environmental goals must be balanced by concern for economic opportunities for the poor. This

includes 20% who believe that minorities must be protected against costly environmental regulations that deprive them of much-needed jobs.3

1 of 3 10/15/00 1:52 AM

EE-RM-STD-98-440 COMMENT 73MM

National Policy Analysis #310: Eco ... or and Minorities - September 2000 http://www.nationalcenter.orglNPA310.htmi 

, 

• 

, 

• 

10f3 

EE-RM/STD-98-440 -tJ:!73- #1 /J1 

• • ;{' Y""fi i • Nanonal Poltcy ~.",'!I :Analysts 

# 310 

A Pub/lcatfon of The National Center for Public Policy Research 

September 

2000 

Economic Opportunity and Social Issues Trump-Environment as Top 

Concerns for Poor and Minorities 

By John K. Carlisle * 

?ooft, MtNoftrflifs.( 

Se:"',o~S ~"FFe.~ 

O(~PAAAI~ .Al>"S'~St: 

I f'4 p,4c.:r Of Po' Vt.A1ioN 

Environmental laws are unfair to minorities and the poor because, although the~ are least a e to pay. 

they must bear the greatest costs for adhering to those laws through lost jobs an higher pnces . 

So concludes the results of a recent survey of 69 environmental justice groups conducted by the National 

Center for Public Policy Research. These groups represent a diverse collection of African-American, 

Hispanic and Native American activist organizations. These groups have also identified themselves, to 

varying degrees, as concerned about environmental justice for minorities and the poor. 

In 1994, President Bill Clinton attempted to establish an environmental justice policy by issuing an 

executive order. That order required federal agencies to promote environmental justice for minorities 

and the poor by ensuring that agency policies do not inflict additional environmental burdens on these 

communities. The order stems from the belief that the poor and minorities suffer more environmental ills 

than other Americans. 1 

But, as the National Center survey discovered, this concept of environmental justice is woefully 

inadequate. While not denying the need to ensure that minorities are not inflicted with excessive 

environmental problems, the groups surveyed by the National Center understand true environmental 

justice to include far more than just the natural environment but the social and economic environment as 

well. The results of the survey suggest that true environmental justice, according to these groups, also 

means taking into account the urgent need for economic improvement, better-paying jobs, educational 

opportunity and access to better health care. 

When asked, for instance, to rank their top public policy concern out of a list of six issues - education, 

health care, racism, economic advancement, environmental progress and crime - only six percent of 

environmental justice groups ranked the environment as their top priority. An overwhelming 91 % of 

respondents ranked education, health care, fighting racism and economic advancement as more 

important than environmental issues.2 

10115/00 1 :52 AM 
National Policy Analysis #310: Eco...or and Minorities - September 2UUu ntp://www.natuonalcenter.org/iN 

A; lu.ntmi

;- ,EE-RM/STD-98-440 , r" ,473 >:.. ' , ' 

Indeed, the need for introducing a sense of balance to environmental policy was of pre-eminent concern.

When asked if environmental laws are applied unevenly such that minorities pay the greatest costs, in

terms of lost jobs and higher prices, of environmental regulations, 63% agreed. In addition, 47% of

environmental justice groups believe that environmental regulatory agencies are unsympathetic to the

needs and concerns of the poor and minorities. Not surprisingly, then, 74% of environmental justice

groups believe that government should be required to determine that proposed environmental laws

would not have a disproportionate impact on minority and low-income commumties betore beinaladopted.4'

Despite this clear call for economic fairness, the Administration's current environmental justice policy

ignores these concerns. Since President Clinton's 1994 executive order, several poor communities with

substantial minority residents have been deprived of urgently needed job-creating businesses by the

Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) in the name of the Administration's skewed concept of

environmental justice. In one of the more outrageous cases, Select Steel Inc. proposed to build a $175

million steel mill that would create 200 jobs in the economically-distressed community of Genesee

County, Michigan. But at the prodding of a handful of local activists crying environmental racism, the

EPA claimed that pollution from Select Steel would unfairly affect minorities.5 In 1998, the company

was forced to locate to a more economically affluent area. Senator Carl Levin (D-MI) blasted the EPA's

harassment of Select Steel, wondering "how in heaven's name would the environment of this nation be

improved" by thwarting job-creation in depressed communities.6

Environmental improvement certainly is important but, to many environmental justice groups fighting

on behalf of their impoverished communities, it is hardly the only policy priority. Jobs, quality education

and health care are often equally or more important concerns to struggling minorities. Indeed, by not

balancing the need for economic improvement and other goals, the Administration's current

environ-mental justice policy becomes environmental injustice.

Footnotes:

1 Christopher Foreman, "...And Environmental Justice For All," Priorities, Vol. 9, No. 4, The Brookings Institution,

Washington, DC, 1997.

2 "Survey of Environmental Justice Groups," Conducted by The National Center For Public Policy Research, Washington,

DC, July-August, 2000.

3 Ibid.

4 Ibid.

5 David Mastio, "EPA Race Policy Cost Flint a Plant," The Detroit News, March 2, 1999.

6 David Mastio, "EPA Aided Mill Fighters," The Detroit News, September 23, 1998.

###

John K. Carlisle is director of The National Center for Public Policy Research's Environmental Policy

Task Force. He can be reached at JCarlisleanationalcenter.org.

2 o 310 ...... ......- 1 / 0 1 5A........ 

The aional ener or archAM /15/00 1:52 

2 of 3 10/15/00 1:52 AM

EE-RM-STD-98-440 COMMENT 73MM

National Policy Analysis #310: Eco ... or and Mmontles - :september :wuu nnp:/Iwww.natlOnalcemer.orgtNPAJ 1 u.ntml 

, 

• 

20f3 

EE-RM/STD-98-440 473 -/IJIYl 

Despite this clear call for economic fairness, the Administration's current environmental justice policy 

ignores these concerns. Since President Clinton's 1994 executive order, several poor communities with 

substantial minority residents have been deprived of urgently needed job-creating businesses by the 

Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) in the name of the Administration's skewed concept of 

environmental justice. In one of the more outrageous cases, Select Steel Inc. proposed to build a $175 

million steel mill that would create 200 jobs in the economically-distressed community of Genesee 

County, Michigan. But at the prodding of a handful of local activists crying environmental racism, the 

EPA claimed that pollution from Select Steel would unfairly affect minorities.5 In 1998, the company 

was forced to locate to a more economically affluent area. Senator Carl Levin (D-MI) blasted the EPA's 

harassment of Select Steel, wondering "how in heaven's name would the environment of this nation be 

improved" by thwarting job-creation in depressed communities.6 

Environmental improvement certainly is important but, to many environmental justice groups fighting 

on behalf of their impoverished communities, it is hardly the only policy priority. Jobs, quality education 

and health care are often equally or more important concerns to struggling minorities. Indeed, by not 

balancing the need for economic improvement and other goals, the Administration's current 

environ-mental justice policy becomes environmental injustice. 

Footnotes: 

1 Christopher Foreman, ." ... And Environmental Justice For All," Priorities, Vol. 9, No.4, The Brookings Institution, 

Washington, DC, 1997. 

2 "Survey of Environmental Justice Groups," Conducted by The National Center For Public Policy Research, Washington, 

DC, July-August, 2000. 

3 Ibid. 

4 Ibid. 

5 David Mastio, "EPA Race Policy Cost Flint a Plant," The Detroit News, March 2, 1999. 

6 David MaStio, "EPA Aided Mill Fighters," The Detroit News, September 23, 1998. 

### 

John K. Carlisle is director of The National Center for Public Policy Research's Environmental Policy 

Task Force. He can be reached at JCarlisle@nationalcenter.org. 

~~J :-. ., I • The y earch 

10/15/001:52 AM 
__________________ _ -EE-RM/STD-98-440 ) 73,/

_NEWS FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

Guinermo Meneses, 202/585b-06 October 6, 2000

New Energy Efficiency Standards for

Residential Clothes Washers Proposed

Energy' Efficient Clothes Washers Will Save Consumers Money

and Help Maintain a Cleaner Environment

The Department of Energy (DOE) this week proposed new energy efficiency standards for residential

clothes washers that will benefit consumers and the environment. Over a 25-year period, the proposed

standards will cut water use by some 10.5 trillion gallons and save enough energy to light 16 million

homes.

"The new clothes washers standards are a win-win for consumers and the environment" said Secretary

Richardson. "Consumers can expect to save over $200 in water and energy costs over the life of the

product. The reduction in energy use will also help improve the reliability of the nation's electricity

supply and maintain a cleaner environment."

The proposed standards are based on an agreement among manufacturers and energy efficiency

advocates and highlight the Energy Department's commitment to improving the process for setting

energy efficiency standards. While the standards are subject to a final rule-making by the department,

it is expected that the agreement's recommendations will be adopted for the final standards. ^

rtemP

Parties to the agreement include: the Natural Resources Defense Council; American Council for an OiANg

Energy-Efficient Economy; the Alliance to Save Energy; Northwest Power Planning Council; the Cit

of Austin, Texas; Pacific Gas and Electric Company; the Appliance Standards Awareness Project;

California Energy Commission; and the Association of Home Appliance Manufacturers. The

Association of Home Appliance Manufacturers includes: Alliance Laundry Systems; Amana; Asko;

Frigidaire; General Electric Appliances; Maytag; Miele; Fisher Pavkel: and Whirlpool.

V The proposed clothes washer standards were publishedin Thursday's Feeral Registen the

epartment expects to issue ru200 The standards go into effect stages,

January 1, 2004. and January 1, 2007. The firsstage would reduce clothes washer energy use by 22

percent and the final stage would reduce energy use by 35 percent. Most manufacturers currently offer

some products which meet the 2007 standards.

This is the fourth in a series of proposed standards set forth by Secretary Richardson to improve the

energy efficiency of lighting and household appliances.

Media Contact: Guillermo Meneses, 202/586-5806

Release No. R-00-255

E U.S. Department of Energy 0 Office of Public Affairs * Washington. DC 20585 A

EE-RM-STD-98-440 COMMENT 73MM

, 

, • 

• 

, 

• 

EE .. RM/STO-98-440 - #- 7~:S-/!l Ill. 

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE 

October 6, 2000 

New Energy Efficiency Standards for 

Residential Clothes Washers Proposed 

Energy Efficient Clothes Washers Will Save Consumers Money 

and Help Maintain a Cleaner Environment 

The Department of Energy (DOE) this week proposed new energy efficiency standards for residential 

clothes washers that will benefit consumers and the environment. Over a 25-year period, the proposed 

standards will cut water use by some 10.5 trillion gallons and save enough energy to light 16 million 

homes. 

"The new clothes washers standards are a win-win for consumers and the environment" said Secretary 

Richardson. "Consumers can expect to save over $200 in water and energy costs over the life of the 

product. The reduction in energy use will also help improve the reliability of the nation's electricity 

supply and maintain a cleaner environment." 

The proposed standards are based on an agreement among manufacturers and energy efficiency 

advocates,; and highlight the Energy Department's commitment to improving the process for setting 

energy efficiency standards. 'While the standards are subject to a final rule-making by the department, 

it is expected that the agreement's recommendations will be adopted for the final standards . • • r 

, 

• 

Parties to the agreement include: the Natural Resources Defense Council; American Council for an 

Energy-Efficient Economy; the Alliance to Save Energy; Northwest Power Planning Council; the Cih~";""'-­

of Austin, Texas; Pacific Gas and Electric Company; the Appliance Standards Awareness Project; 

California Energy Commission; and the Association of Home Appliance Manufacturers. The 

Association of Home Appliance Manufacturers includes: Alliance Laundry Systems; Amana; Asko; 

Frigidaire; General Electric Appliances; Maytag; Miele; Fisher 'kel' and Whirl 001. 

~* .c.tn· rt ~ cJ .. 1"1\ 

The proposed clothes washer standards were ublished in Thursday's Fe era RegIster an the 

epartment ex ects to issue th al ru e y anu 2001. The standards go into effect in two stages, 

January 1,2004, and January 1,200. e Irs stage wou d reduce clothes washer energy use by 22 

percent and the final stage would reduce energy use by 35 percent. Most manufacturers currently offer 

some products which meet the 2007 standards. 

This is the fourth in a series of proposed standards set forth by Secretary Richardson to improve the 

energy efficiency of lighting and household appliances. 

Media Contact: Guillermo Meneses, 202/586-5806 

Release No. R-00-255 

II u.s. Department of Energy ., Office of Public Affairs • Washington. DC 20585 II 
Congres of the alniteb States

'aatjington, ABC 20515

EE-RM/STbD.98-440 / 3-A

September 6, 2000

INDUSTRY, ENVIRONMENTALISTS AND ENERGYEFFICIENCY ORGANIZATIONS WORKING TOGETHER

TO SAVE ENERGY AND WATER

Dear Colleague:

With the help of a broad coalition of industry, environmental and energy-efficiency

organizations, we have introduced the Resources Efficient Appliance Incentives Act (H.R. 4977)

for super energy-efficient clothes washing machines and refrigerators.

H.R. 4977 would provide a tax credit to manufactures of super energy-efficient appliances

106TH CONGRESS H R 4977

2D SESSION ,. R 4977

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to provide a credit against tax for energy efficient appliances.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

July 26, 2000

'SEC. 45D. ENERGY EFFICIENT APPLIANCE CREDIT.

'(a) GENERAL RULE- For purposes of section 38, the energy efficient appliance credit determined under this section

for the taxable year is an amount equal to the applicable amount determined under subsection (b) with respect to

qualified energy efficien liances t produced by the taxpayeduring the calendar year ending with or within the

taxable year.

'(b) APPLICABLE AMOUNT- For purposes of subsection (a), the applicable amount determined under this

subsection with respect to a taxpayer is the sum of--

'(1) in the case of an energy efficient clothes washer described in subsection (d)(2)(A) or an energy efficient

refrigerator described in subsection (d)(3)(B)(i), an amount equal to--

'(A) $50, multiplied by

'(B) the number of such washers and refrigeratorsioroduced by the tax ayeduring such calendar year, and

'(2) in the case of an energy efficient clothes washer described in subsection (d)(2)(B) or an energy efficient

refrigerator described in subsection (d)(3)(B)(ii), an amount equal to--

'(A) $100, multiplied by

'(B) the number of such washers and refrigerators produced by the taxpayer during such calendar year.

'(c) LIMITATION ON MAXIMUM CREDIT-

'(1) IN GENERAL- The maximum amount of credit allowed under subsection (a) with respect to a taxpayer for

all taxable years shall be--

'(A) $30,000,000 with respect to the credit determined under subsection (b)(1), and

'(B) $30,000,000 with respect to the credit determined under subsection (b)(2). *f wTA: fA'AYER CRAriGL DhEFIAk IA

A |APPtLIACE PRODUCE.R NO APP-IANE CONSUMER I

EE-RM-STD-98-440 COMMENT 73MM

~ongrt55 of !bt Wntttb ~t~tt5 

·Bubington. IlOC 20515 ... '- .. 

. . EE-RM/STD-98-440 ..,:It 73-Jrt 11/. 

September 6, 2000 

INDUSTRY, ENVIRONMENTALISTS AND ENERGYEFFICIENCY ORGANIZATIONS WORKING TOGETHER 

TO SAVE ENERGY AND WATER 

Dear Colleague: 

. ~ith the help o~ a broad coalition of industry, environmental and energy-efficiency 

orgaruzations, we hav~ mtroduced the Resources Efficient Appliance Incentives Act (H.R. 4977) 

for super energy-efficlent clothes washing machines and refrigerators. 

H.R. 4977 would provide a tax credit to manufactures of super en~gy-efficient appliances . f • . 

106TH CONGRESS H R 4977 2D SESSION' 

• •• 

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to provide a credit against tax for energy efficient appliances. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

July 26, 2000 

••• 

'SEC. 45D. ENERGY EFFICIENT APPLIANCE CREDIT. 

'(a) GENERAL RULE- For purposes of section 38,the energy efficient appliance credit determined under this section 

for the taxable year is an amount e ual to the a licable amount determined under subsection (b) with respect to 

qualified energy efficien Iiances roduced b the tax a e during the calendar year ending with or within the 

taxable year. 

, (b) APPLICABLE AMOUNT-For purposes of subsection (a), the applicable amount determined under this 

subsection with respect to a taxpayer is the sum of--

'(1) in the case of an energy efficient clothes washer described in subsection (d)(2)(A) or an energy efficient 

refrigerator described in subsection (d)(3)(B)(i), an amount equal to--

'(A) $50, multiplied by 

'(B) the number of such washers and refri erator roduced b the tax a e uring such calendar year, and 

'(2) in the case of an energy efficient clothes washer escn e in su sectIon 2)(B) or an energy efficient 

refrigerator described in subsection (d)(3)(B)(ii), an amount equal to--

'(A) $100, multiplied by 

'(B) the number of such washers and refrigerators produced by the taxpayer during such calendar year. 

'(c) LIMITATION ON MAXIMUM CREDIT-

'(1) IN GENERAL- The maximum amount of credit allowed under subsection (a) with respect to a taxpayer for 

all taxable years shall be--

'(A) $30,000,000 with respect to the credit determined under subsection (b)(1), and 

'(B) $30,000,000 with respect to the credit determined under subsection (b)(2). 

TAXf'A'IE~ CRAP1iL'I DE.FINEPA-5 , 

ArpL..IANCE PRODUCE.R, ~O,. Af'T>LlANLE. CoNSvM£t< 

L-~----------~------------------------~. 
Department of Energy - News Release http://www.doe.gov/news/releases00/maypr/prO 143.htn

EE-RM/STD-98-440 S ,l ^lo 

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

May 23, 2000

NEWS MEDIA CONTACT:

Guillermo A. Meneses, 202/586-5806

Washing Machines To Become More Energy Efficient

Agreement Will Yield Big Savings for Consumers and the

Environment

MLo Ct"*e-e Joined by executives from the nation's top appliance makers and energy efficiency advocates, U.S.

Aio tpao er Secretary of Energy Bill Richardson today announced that a signifcant agreement has been reached

rer«eA-eTe to improve the energy efficiency otresidential clothes washers. As a result of the new agreement, ' _re _tI ,consumers nationwide will save nearly 5 quadrillion Btu (British thermal units) of energy and reduce

water use by some 10.5 trillion gallons over a 25-year period. That translates into a savings of as

much as 18 gallons of water per wash.

id]~~'.s '"Today's announcement is a victory for consumers, manufacturers, and for the environment," said

U"(4W9na4w 4 Secretary Richardson. "The standards announced today will save enough electricity to light 16 million

m;woresof U.S. homes for 25 years, while cutting greenhouse gas emissions by an amount equal to that

;TeJd produced by three million cars every year."

The agreement represents the latest in a string of agreements reached with the appliance industry to

develop and manufacture energy-efficient and cost-effective consumer products. Last month, Vice

President Al Gore announced proposed standards to improve the energy efficiency of residential

water heaters, which would save consumers more than $23 billion in energy costs over the next 20

years.

/as/1 By the end of the year, the Energy Department expects to issue rules for fluorescent lamp ballasts

$;dmTg;qt ~residential central air conditioners, commercial heating, air conditioning and water heating -equipment.

Water heating and clothes washing combined account for about 15 percent of all household energy consumed in the United States and costs consumers approximately $21 billion each year.

Agreement participants include the Association of Home Appliance Manufacturers, Alliance Laundry Systems, Amana, Asko, Frigidaire, General Electric Appliances, Maytag, Miele, Fisher & Paykel and

Whirlpool.

Other organizations that support this agreement include the Natural Resources Defense Council, American Council for an Energy-Efficient Economy, the Alliance to Save Energy, Northwest Power

Planning Council, the City of Austin, Texas, Pacific Gas and Electric Company, the Appliance Standards Awareness Project and California Energy Commission.

RbWl I While the agreement is subject to a final rulemaking by DOE, it is expected that the joint <-a iip l^ recommendations by manufacturers and efficiency advocates will be accepted and wrtten into the

n 11 r F inal standards. Although most manufacturers currently offer some products wnicn meet me .- 09 M4 S3 PLAbNNED ; proposed standards, all products would have to meet them by 2007. NoPK WAS

The proposed clothes washer standards are expected to be published in the Federal Register in E'fC D uN

)i _ _June and the final rule is expected to e issued b December. TU

ullllmffiinri Ilaii~i~~^ Ba ^ ^~~

EE-RM-STD-98-440 COMMENT 73MM

Department of Energy - News Release http://www.doe.gov/news/releasesOO/maypr/pr00143.htm 

EE-RM/STD-98-440 ./:lF13.-/I1f)f, 

FOr~ IMMEDIATE RELEASE May 23, 2000 ~--________________ _ 

NEWS MEDIA CONTACT: 

Guillermo A. Meneses, 202/586-5806 

Washing Machines To Become More Energy 

Effocient 

Agreement Will Yield Big Savings for Consumers and the 

Environment 

Joined by executives from the nation's top appliance makers and enerr

y efficienc¥ advocates, U.S. 

Secretary of Energy Bill Richardson today announced that a slgmfican agreemen has been reached 

to Improve the energy efficiency of residential clothes washers. As a result of the new agreement, 

consumers nationwide will save nearly 5 quadrillion Btu (British thermal units) of energy and reduce 

water use by some 10.5 trillion gallons over a 25-year period. That translates into a savings of as 

much as 18 gallons of water per wash. 

"Today's announcement is a victory for consumers, manufacturers, and for the environment," said 

Secretary Richardson. "The standards announced today will save enough electricity to light 16 million 

U.S. homes for 25 years, while cutting greenhouse gas emissions by an amount equal to that 

produced by three million cars every year." • 

The agreement represents the latest in a string of agreements reached with the appliance industry to 

develop and manufacture energy-efficient and cost-effective consumer products. Last month, Vice 

President AI Gore announced proposed standards to improve the energy effiCiency of residential 

J water heaters. which would save consumers more than $23 billion in energy costs over the next 20 

years. 

Agreement participants include the Association of Home Appliance Manufacturers, Alliance Laundry 

Systems, Amana, Asko, Frigidaire, General Electric Appliances, May tag , Miele, Fisher & Paykel and 

Whirlpool. 

Other organizations that support this agreement include the Natural Resources Defense Council, 

American Council for an Energy-Efficient Economy, the Alliance to Save Energy, Northwest Power 

Planning Council, the City of Austin, Texas, Pacific Gas and Electric Company, the Appliance 

Standards Awareness Project and Califomia Energy Commission. 

While the agreement is SUb~ct to a final rulemaking by DOE, it is expected that the joint 

recommenaabons by manu cfurers and effiCiency advocates will be acceEted and wnnen into the 

final standards. Although most manufacturers currently offer some produc s whlcn meet the 

proposed standards, all products would have to meet them by 2007. 

The pr0'd0sed clothes washer standards are ex~ected to be published in the Federal Register in 

June n . the final rule IS ex ected to be Issued December. 

ON ~'f.u, 

NoPR wAS 

ctffC"£J) IN 

;nJN~ 
Whirlpool Investor Relations http://www.corporate-ir.net/ireye/.. .&script=41 &layout=7&item_id=94616

EE-RM/STD-98-440_-- -:l-,_/

erview Whirlpool Corporation (ticker: WHR, exchange: New York Stock

Whirlpool News Exchange) News Release - 23-May-2000 Whirlpool News .. . _ _ . _ . ___- arlt.__ Ai

Stock Quote Whirlpool Corporation Endorses Landmark Agreement a

Stock Chart Among Appliance Manufacturers, Energy Advocates and

Government; Agreement Will Save Consumers Billions Fundamentals

Earnings Estimates BENTON HARBOR, Mich.--(BUSINESS WIRE)--May 23,

Annual Reports 2000--Whirlpool Corporation (NYSE:WHR) today announced

t an agreement among the appliance industry, environmental Conf. Calystsl Audio W groups, energy efficiency advocates, utilities and the U.S Conf. Call Audio w government regarding clothes washer energy efficiency, } )

Calendar standards. The agreement includes an integrated ackageof

2000 Dividend Info creased energy efficiency e standards, new energy labelin and 9 energy reporting requirements and manufacturer s tax credits

Direct Stock for producing y high efficiency clothes washers. Once adopted I ! I

Purchase Plan · by the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) and Congress, the

Presentations new agreement is expected to save consumers an estimated

Corp. Governance $25 billion in utility costs and reduce water usage by 6 trillion

gallons during a 30-year period. The 5 quadrillion BTU's of

SEC Filings energy savings are equivalent to the electricity produced by

Info Request five large coal-fired power plants, while the water saved is m Ew

E-mail Alerts enough to supply the water needs for more than 6 million ( Ai_: homes for 25 years. Company History

Home "Whirlpool endorses this historic agreement that not only coSi

represents a significant advancement in energy efficiency, but

will also benefit the environment," said JeffFettig, Whirlpoolo tx

President and COO. "Whirlpool is uniquely positioned to

deliver on these consumer savings and benefits. And, as a rere

global company we plan to use our global product

development and technology capabilities to develop both

clothes washers and refrigerators that exceed the new energy

efficiency levels in exchange for the tax credit we hope to

receive as a part of this agreement."

hor __________ 1 pool I L As making the global more than leader one in home out of laundry, every two today home responsible washin for , EIe^e. e bL fts L X

io'\ itB 7 machines in North America, the company expects to deliver Q

m\ore than half of the benefits to consumers. For example, later -Jcke df al

this year the company will introduce a new-to-the-world

clothes washing product platform, which will offer consumers

high energy efficiency with the largest capacity and best

cleaning performance while treating garments with a

gentleness unsurpassed in the top-loading washer product

category.

"This new washer is just one of many exciting new products

that our company plans to introduce which deliver not only

great energy efficiency but also great consumer-focused

features and benefits," said Fettig.

With manufacturing facilities in 13 countries, Whirlpool's

product design and manufacturing teams have long worked in

tandem with governments and the scientific community to

1 of 2 10/15/00 12:42 AM

EE-RM-STD-98-440 COMMENT 73MM

Whirlpool Investor Relations http://www.corporate-ir.netJireye/ ... &script=410&layout=7 &item _id=,94616 

EE-RM/STD-98-440_ :tf:"-13 -1If1lf. " 

~ , f 7( "" ~ ,~ ~:>.,t.rf~" "J{ ~~} " " ~..." ~ ,"~. '~l~v\ })1;1~ ( f.,. ~"", ".~ ,"~ j 

OVerview 

Whirlpool News 

Stock Quote 

Stock Chart 

Calendar 

U U.· g ~" 

Exchange) News Release - 23-May-2000 

Whirlpool Corporation Endorses Landmark Agreement 

Among Appliance Manufacturers, Energy Advocates and 

Government; Agreement Will Save Consumers Billions 

BENTON HARBOR, Mich.--(BUSINESS WIRE)--May 23, 

2000--Whirlpool Corporation (NYSE: WHR) today announced 

Purchase Plan • .p.;;;.~~;iFi~~=~~"';;';';;'=;~~~ 

Presentations 

Corp. Governance 

SEC Filings 

Info Request 

E-mail Alerts 

Company History 

Home "Whirlpool endorses this historic agreement that not only 

represents a significant advancement in energy efficiency, but 

will also benefit the environment," said Jeff Fettig, Whirlpool 

President and COO. "Whirlpool is uniquely positioned to 

deliver on these consumer savings and benefits. And, as a 

global company we plan to use our global product 

development and technology capabilities to develop both 

clothes washers and refrigerators that exceed the new energy 

efficiency levels in exchange for the tax credit we hope to 

receive as a part of this agreement." . 

As the global leader in home laundry, today responsible for 

{ 

making more than one out of every two home washin.s 

machines in North America the company expects to deliver 

more than haJf of the 6eneffts to consumers. For example, later ..... -------.... this year the company will introduce a new-to-the-world 

10f2 

clothes washing product platform, which will offer consumers 

high energy efficiency with the largest capacity and best 

cleaning performance while treating garments with a 

gentleness unsurpassed in the top-loading washer product 

category. 

"This new washer is just one of many exciting new products 

that our company plans to introduce which deliver not only 

great energy efficiency but also great consumer-focused 

features and benefits," said Fettig. 

With manufacturing facilities in 13 countries, Whirlpool's 

product design and manufacturing teams have long worked in 

tandem with governments and the scientific community to 

10/15/0012:42 AM 
Whirlpool Investor Relations http://www.corporate-ir.net/ireye/... &script=410&layout=7&item_id=94616

EE-RM/STD-98-440 -:: X M/w.

bring consumers resource-friendly products, recyclable

packaging and conservation programs. Over the past few

years, Whirlpool advancements have included the Resource

Saver(TM) Wash System, the first top loading ENERGY

STAR(R) rated washing machine and the new Conquest(TM)

refrigerator that surpasses the energy standards that are to go

into effect in the summer of 2001 more than a year before

required by law. The DOE has also recognized the company as

its ENERGY STAR Appliance Partner of the Year for the past

two years.

"Great innovations such as the Resource Saver(TM) and our

other soon to be introduced washing platform are the result of

our vast global technology resources being brought to bear on

designing great consumer-focused appliances that are good for

the environment," added Fettig. "And, this agreement provides

us with the type of market based incentives we need to keep

investing in such innovations."

Whirlpool Corporation is the world's leading manufacturer and

marketer of major home appliances. Headquartered in Benton

Harbor, the company manufactures in 13 countries and

markets products under 11 major brand names in more than

170 countries. Additional information about the company can

be found on the Internet at www.WhirlpoolCorp.com.

CONTACT: Whirlpool Corporation

Media Contact

Christopher Wyse, 616/923-3417

christopher_jwyse@email.whirlpool.com

Investor Contact

Tom Filstrup, 616/923-3189

thomas_c_filstrup@email.whirlpool.com

"Safe Harbor" statement under the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of

1995: Please note that while you are reviewing this information, these

presentations were created as of the dates listed, and reflected management

views as of those dates. Statements in the presentations regarding Whirlpool

Corporation's business, which are not historical facts, are "forward-looking

statements" that involve risks and uncertainties. For a discussion of such risks

and uncertainties, which could cause actual results to differ from those

contained in the forward-looking statements, see "Forward Looking Statements"

in the Company's Form 10-K or Form 10-Q for the most recently ended

calendar quarter.

2 of 2 10/15/00 12:42 AN

EE-RM-STD-98-440 COMMENT 73MM

Whirlp601 Investor Relations 

20f2 

http://www.corporate-ir.netlireye/ ... &script=41 O&layout=7 &item _id=946 1 6 

EE-RM/STD-98-440 -:f/ J3-IY/I}1, 

bring consumers resoUrce-friendly products, recyclable 

packaging and conservation programs. Over the past few 

years, Whirlpool advancements have included the Resource 

Saver(TM) Wash System, the first top loading ENERGY 

ST AR(R) rated washing machine and the new Conquest(TM) 

refrigerator that surpasses the energy standards that are to go 

into effect in the summer of 2001 more than a year before 

required by law. The DOE has also recognized the company as 

its ENERGY STAR Appliance Partner of the Year for the past 

two years. 

"Great innovations such as the Resource Saver(TM) and our 

other soon to be introduced washing platform are the result of 

our vast global technology resources being brought to bear on 

designing great consumer-focused appliances that are good for 

the environment," added Fettig. "And, this agreement provides 

us with the type of market based incentives 'we need to keep 

investing in such innovations." 

Whirlpool Corporation is the world's leading manufacturer and 

marketer of major home appliances. Headquartered in Benton 

Harbor, the company manufactures in 13 countries and 

markets products under 11 major brand names in more than 

170 countries. Additional information about the company can 

be found on the Internet at www.WhirlpooICorp.com. 

CONTACT: Whirlpool Corporation 

Media Contact 

Christopher Wyse, 616/923-3417 

christopher_j_wyse@email.whirlpool.com 

Investor Contact 

Tom Filstrup, 616/923-3189 

thomas_c_filstrup@email.whirlpool.com 

"Safe Harbor" statement under the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 

1995: Please note that while you are reviewing this information, these 

presentations were created as of the dates listed, and reflected management 

views as of those dates. Statements in the presentations regarding Whirlpool 

Corporation's business, which are not historical facts, are "forward-looking 

statements" that involve risks and uncertainties. For a discussion of such risks 

and uncertainties, which could cause actual results to differ from those 

contained in the forward-looking statements, see "Forward Looking Statements" 

in the Company's Form IO-K or Form IO-Q for the most recently ended 

calendar quarter. 

10115/0012:42 AM 
EE-RM/STD-98-440 ,//-/ 

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

News 7 @ 5:00 PM

WJLA TV, Washington, D.C. October 3, 2000, 5:00 PM

DOE and Energy Standards

BROADCAST EXCERPT

DEL WALTERS: The Department will soon require energy efficiency standards on

major household appliances...but as Alexa Lee reports, they won't save consumers

money, at least at first.

ALEXA LEE: You may not have noticed it yet, but that old American washing machine

is getting a makeover...

If you like it the old-fashioned way, from the top, Whirlpool started selling this

design last month...

Whether it's a more efficient top loader or a front loader, the cost to the consumer liH

can be a few hundred dollars more. This one is selling for $895... it can be sticker shock -

for some customers...

[END OF REPORT.]

EE-RM-STD-98-440 COMMENT 73MM

, , .... '~,? ,(:.. ., 

u.s. DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY 

News 7 @ 5:00 PM 

WJLA TV, Washington, D.C. October 3, 2000, 5:00 PM 

DOE and Energy Standards 

BROADCAST EXCERPT 

DEL WALTERS: The Department will soon require energy efficiency standards on 

major household appliances ... but as Alexa Lee reports, they won't save consumers 

money, at least at first. 

ALEXA LEE: You may not have noticed it yet, but that old American washing machine 

is getting a makeover ... 

If you like it the old-fashioned way, from the top, Whirlpool started selling this 

design last month ... 

Whether it's a more efficient top loader or a front loader, the cost to the consumer~( ~ H 

can be a few hundred dollars more. This one is selling for $895 ... it can be sticker shock CO? T 

for some customers... . 

[END OF REPORT.] 
F:\M6\KNOLLE\KNOLLE.025 H.L.C.

EE-RM/STD-98-440-7: 75 t-' '

((ri)ginail Signature of Memtber)

106TII CONGRESS V I

2D) SESSION K _

IN THE HO1USE OF REPRESENTATIVES

Mr. KNOLL,ELNBIR.(U introducd(rt the oillowing bill; which was referred to the

Committee on(

A BILL

To require ani extension of tlie comment periods relating

to celttainl proposed irles.

1 Be it eianctled bq the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the Un ited Stales of America in Congress assembled,

-_ 3 SECTION 1. EXTENSION.

4 The comment periods on the proposed irles related

5 to clothes washers published at 65 Federal Register

~- ~ 6 59549-59588 (October 5, 2000) and the proposed rules

7 related to residentiall central air conclitioners and heat

October 5, 2000

F:\V6\1 00500\1 00500.082

EE-RM-STD-98-440 COMMENT 73MM

-F: \M6\KNOLLE\KNOLLE.025 HJ.J.C. 

October 5,2000 

lOG'l'll CONGRESS 

2]) SgSSIO:'-J 

EE-RM/STO-98-440-# 15 -tf/hf, 

(Orir-rimll Sig-natlll'p of Member) 

H.R. -----

l\11'. KNOTJIJENBERU iut1'odlleetl the it)lll)ll"iug" bill; which was 1'efe1'1'e(l to the 

Commit.t.ee ou ___________ _ 

A BILL 

To require elll extension of 1 he comment periods relating 

to cCltain proposed rules. 

1 Be 'it enacted by the Senate and House of Repr'esenta2 l'ives· of tlw Uwital 8 tales ()f ilrnerica 'in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. EXTENSION. 

4 The comment periods on the proposed rules related 

5 to clothes washers published at 65 }"ederal Register 

6 ;")9;")49-;")9;")88 (October ;"), 2(00) and the proposed rules 

7 related to l'csiclentinl central air conditioners and heat 

F:\ V6\ 100500\ 100500.082 
EE-RM/STD-98-440-517 JM

F:\M6\KNOLLE\KNOLLE.025 'H.L.C.

2

1 pumps published at 65 Federal Register 59589-59632

2 (October 5, 2000) shall both be extended from December

3 4, 2000, for a period, of not less than 120 additional cal4 endar days.

October 5,2000

F:\V6\1 00500\1 00500.082

EE-RM-STD-98-440 COMMENT 73MM

F:\M6\KNOLLE\KNOLLE.025 

EE-RM/STD-98-440--# 75..MNt. 

H.hC. 

2 ,. \ ~ :" ~', . ',' .... ~:~ \ '\ .:' ."'~ .... ) :.; 

1 pumps pul)lished at,' 6'5 'Pederal Register 59589-59632 

2 (October ;), 20(0) '3hall both be eAi,ended from December 

3 4, 2000, for a perind, of not less than 120 additional cal4 en dar days. 

October 5, 2000 

F:W6\100500\100500.082 
EE-RM/STD-98-440- ii-f *

Attachment 2

Agreement on Conpensus Recommendations to

The Denartment ofEnertg Relating

Euergv Effic incy Standards for Clthes Waashes

And Related Maters

MaY 23, 200

THIS AGREEMENT memorializes the commitmnnts made by the undersigned

representatives of the organizations (the "Joint Stakeholders') regarding the submission of

consensus recommendations to the Department of Energy (the "Departmcnt") concerning

modification of the Department's regulations prescribing energy efficiency standards for clothes

washers (10 CFR §430.32(g)) and other related matters, and regarding effectuating these

consensus recommendations.

1. The Joint Stakeholders will jointly submit to the Department the attached proposal

(the "Proposal") for modifying the Department's regulations, revising the Energy Star program

and advocating manufaoturer tax credit legislation. Thc Joint Stakeholders will request that the

Dcpartment publish the proposed standard in a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (the "NOPR")

and adopt the proposed standard, or its equivalent, as a final rule by Dec. 31, 2000. The Joint

Stakeholders also will request that the Department accept the specfied Energy Star rcvisions and

support the manufacturer tax credit legisiation.

2. The Joint Stakeholders will jointly file, within four weeks of the date of this

agreement, comments and supporting analyses that address all of the statutory criteria that the

Department is required to take into account in promulgating changes to energy efficiency

standards for covered products. The joint comments will advocate adoption of the proposed

4

r EE-RM-STD-98-440 COMMENT 73MM

EE-RM/STD-98-440 ~Jt J3--fi1 A1 . 

Attachmeot l 

AKtHJDeDt 01 Cop!en5US RecommeJildaUoBJ to . 

l~e DglrtmY' origem bltiy !Q 

Ellcm EffideDSY StIRdl'''' for Cloths lYwul 

ADd Related Matter. 

May 33,1000 

TInS AG:R.BEMENT memorializes the coxnmitromlt, made by the under$igned 

representatives of the organizations (the 4410int Stakeholders'') regarding the submission of 

COQSCMUS recQJlUIlendations to the Department of En erg)' (the '<Department") conccm.1ng 

modification of the Department's regulations prCiCribinS energy efficienoy standards for clothes 

washers (10 CFR §430.32(g» and other rewed matters. and regarding effectuating these 

consensus recommendatjons. 

1. The Joint Stakeholders will jointly submit to the Department the attached proposal 

(the '''Proposal'') for modifYins the Department' 5 regulations~ revising the Encr~ Star program 

and advocating manufaoturer taX credit legislation. The Joint Stakeholders wiU request that the 

Department pUblish the proposed standard in a Notice: QfPropoaed Rulemaking (the '"NOPRt') 

and adopt the pIOpoted ~taudatd, or its equivalent 1$ a final rule by Dec. 31, 2000. The Joint 

Stakeholders a1&o will :request that the Department accept the specified Energy Star revisions and 

support the mauumtllr&l'tax credit legislation. 

2. The Joil1t Sralceholders will jointly file, within four weeks of the date of this 

aareement, comments and supporting 8Dalysos that address an of the statutory criteria. that the . 

Department is required to take into account ;n pf(;lrnuipUna ohanges to energy efficiency 

standards tor covered products. The joint comments will advocate adoption of the proposed 

4 
m ~ ' " ~ - EE-RM/STD-98-440- -.p ..

standard as a final rule. Similar joint or coordinated comments will be filed with respect to the

revisions to the Energy Star program as needed.

3. The Joint Stakeholdera commit to support at the Office of Management and

Budget and other federal agencies that review the Departent's regultions the Department's

promulgation of the proposed standrd as a final role.

4. The Joint Stakeholdes agree not to attempt to verturn or revise or to file or

support any legal or legislative challnge to a final rule that adopts the proposed standard and

agree to support the Department in defending any legal, legislative or administrative challenge to

a final rule that adopts the proposed standard. This provision will still apply if DOE, on its own

volition, adopts a rule that deviates in small particulars from the Proposal.

5. The Joint Stakeholders agree not to advocate to DOE or any other party for

changes to the Energy Star levels specified in the proposal for clothes washers and refrigerators.

6, The Joint Stakeholders agree to cooperate with each other in the preparation of

press releases and pubic statements in support of the Department's adoption of the proposed

standard, the Energy Star revisions and the tax credit legislation.

7. The Joint Stakeholders agree to support and cooperate with each other to obtain

passage of the tax credit legislation, including advocacy in Congress and to the Administration.

The Joint Stakcholders agree to consult with and obtain consent from all parries before

supporting, advocating or agreeing to changes in the tax credit legislationm Such consent will not

unreasonably be withheld. If the tax credit provisions are included in a comprehensive tax bill,

the individual parties to this agreement may ake positions on other aspects of the bill without

onsulting with or getting approval fom other parties, but all parties will work together to seek

passage of the provisions agreed to here.

4

EE-RM-STD-98-440 COMMENT 73MM

EE-RM/STD-98-440 -11:-13 J11/11. 

standard as a final rule. Similar joint or co"nlinated. comments will be filed with respect to the 

revisions to the Energy Star procram as needed. 

3. The Joint Stabholdcra couumt to support at the Office of Management and 

Budget and other federal agencies tllat review the Department's ~ons the Department's ~ . 

promulganOll of the propo.ed stanci,Jtd, as a final rule. 

4. The Joint Stakeholdei'5 agree not'to attempt to OVert\lm or revise or to file or 

support any l~ia1 or lCipJative cha.l1e:nge to a final rule that adopts the proposed. standard. and 

• 

agree to support the Department in def'encting any legal, legislative or administrative QhaJicnge to 

a final rule that adopts the proposed standard. This provision win still apply if DOE. on hs own 

volition, adop~ a rule that deviates in small particulars from 1he Proposal. 

5. The Joint Stakeholders agree not to advocate to DOE or any other party for 

changes to the Energy Star levels specified in the proposal for clorhcs washers and refrigerators. 

6. ~ Ioint Stalceholde:rs agree to coopcato with each. other in the preparation of 

press releases and public statements in support of the Department's adoption of the proposed 

standard. the Energy Star revi5ions and the tax credit legi.latiou. 

7. The 10int Stakeholders agree to support and cooperate with·eacb other to obtain 

passaac ofth.e tax credit legislation. including advocacy in Congress and to the Administration. 

The JoiJlt Stakeholder. agree to consult with and. obtain oonaent from all patties before 

supporting. advocating or agreciug to changes in the tax ~t legislation.. SUCih CODsent will not 

unreasonably be withhold. If the tax credit provisions are included in a comprehensive tax bill, 

the individual parties to this agreement may take pOsitions OD other aspewi of the bill without 

~JlIUlti:ng with or getting approval fi'om. other p~es. but an parties will work topther to seck 

passage oftbe provisions aarced to here. 

4 
EE-RM/STD-98-440-#- 1^ Al .

8. The Joint Stakeholders agree to implement the commitments made in this

Agreement individually or in groups. Eich Joint Stakeholder will respond in good faith to

reasonable requests by other Joint Stakeholders for joint implemetatation of any of these

commintents.

9. This agreement is hereby agreed to, in counterpancs, by the undersigned Joint

Stakeholders. This agrement binds the undersigned Joint Staketholders, their employees, their

agents for purpose of the proposal, and any successors and will take effect when all signatures arc

affixe& This agreement applies for four years from the date of execution except for paragraph 4,

which is not time limited.

4

EE-RM-STD-98-440 COMMENT 73MM

· . 

EE-RM/STD-98-440_# 13;0 M .

8. The Joint Stakeholders aarec to implement the commitments made in this 

Agrcettient individually or in group.s. E'Wh loint Stakeholder will respond in good faith to 

reasonable requests by other Joint Stalceholders for joint implementation of any of these 

commitments. 

9. This agreement is hereby agreed to, in counterpa:1CIJ. by the undersigned 10int 

Stakehold8I'8. This agreement binds the undcmgned Joint Stak~holdersJ their employees, their 

agents for purpose of the proposal~ and lily successors and will take effect when aU signatures are 

affixed. This agreement applies for four years from the date of execution. except for paragraph 4] 

which is not time limited. 

4 
EE-RM/STD-98-440_- ,4 /

Joint Stakeholders

MANMACTURERS ADVOCATES

Allince Laundry SY.s LLC Alliance to Sav Esegy

Thomas F. LTspuu'ce David . Nmmuow, Pruident

Chief xccutive Offccr

Anan Appliances Amiicam Councl fta Energy

Alan Keusl. , Vice Prosdcaz, Tenology & Eftcica Ecoomy Oovenmmat Rola tion Howard OuUr, txccutivc Director

Asko IncospOted Appliance Stubdard Awm«eXcU Project

Micael Wason, Vice Presidet, Govenmnt Andew deLaki, Executive DiTector

Sundtds

Frigidair Home Product Caufnia Eaergy Commission

Ror Leol, Cbief Ficia Officer Robnr PemrelL Conmcisioane

Genal Electric Appliances City of Astin, Tas

Lawreci R. Jobstonw Tony Gregg, Water Comsenvion Mnager

Presidet & Chief Exet3 vc Officer

gMytes Corpoation Natmlu Resources Defem Council

rbouags C, Haorstman, Vice Preidot, John Ada , President

Governmne- Rcladons

Miel, Inc. Nozthwr Po Planaing tir Council

Nick Ord, Preident & Geeral Manager. Mile, USA Frauo L. Casidy, Jr., Chairmn

Fisber & Payke Applancu, hIn. Pafco OQ and mcckic

Gxy Paykcl, Chbif Execiu Offier B rly Alexander, Vice

Whrlpool Coipoaion

JefMS FPlg, PresideMt sd Chief Opeating OfEier

4

EE-RM-STD-98-440 COMMENT 73MM

EE-RM/STD .. 98-440 -If- 7---'!3-111/11. 

Joint Stakeholders 

Amana Appliaacea 

AJm Kusler. P2, V~ Pmid=. TedmolosY &: 

aove~t~.donl 

A.ko Incorporated 

M.icbad Wasson.. Vice Presi~~ Oovemment 

Stalldards 

frigidaire HOlM ProdtlCts -

Ro..-t..oa. CbiefFbanciaJ Oftlcer 

Genes:al ElccUic AppliaDc;es 

LawreACe'R. lolmaon 

Pr~idedt &: OUet Bxewtivc Ofticer 

~ CoEpontion Dou.- C. Horstman, Vice PloaidOAt, 

Govl!n'l.D1flUl kclancms 

Miole. k. 

Nick Ord. Pre&ideat &:: GeneDl MalIaPf, Miele, USA 

4 

ADVOCATES 

A.lliabce to Save Euer&Y 

David M. Nmnzow. Pn:Iident 

Applimcc stu4aTda AwueJ)e.IA Project 

A:odrew deIMld, Executive Dit~lOf 

Calif'o.mia Eurgy CommisAou 

P.o\tcrt Pernell. CoDPiirioa.ct 

City of A1II1iD. Tc:xu 

Tony (keg. w.* Coaserva~1l Mana,=-

NatuNl Resources PefeIqc Council 

loRnAdals. 'Prc&idalc 

N~ro-.tPWmills Council 

Fruk L. CwidY. Jr., CIJaiIman 

.Paci& Gas U1d.Bl~ -

Bewrly A1cua.du, Vice 

Prcsidet1r 
EE-RM/STD-98440J-157- #

The Facts on Proposed Clothes Washer & HVAC Mandates

SITUATION

1. The Department of Energy (DOE) proposed two new regulations on Thursday, October 5,

2000 imposing mandates on 1. clothes washers, and 2. air conditioners & heat pumps.

2. In a backroom deal without consumers or taxpayers groups represented, enviros and

manufacturers cooked up the mandate that DOE has merely rubber-stamped.

3. Roughly 81 million U.S. households have washers. There are roughly 10 million new units

shipped per year in the U.S.

4. John Q. Public and Jane Doe don't know that this mandate is being foisted upon them.

ACTION

Strong statement needed from Congress that the comment period regarding the DOE mandates

needs to be extended by at least 120 days to ensure the public's voice is heard.

REASONING

This particular mandate is a perfect example of when the minimum comment period of 60 days

is insufficient because:

1. The rule directly affects so many households,

2. John Q. Public and Jane Doe don't know about this mandate,

3. The cost increases are so high,

4. The products are available now and people do not buy them,

A. Cost to average consumers estimated at $240 for clothes washers, $274 for

residential central air conditioners, and $486 for residential heat pumps;

B. A load of laundry will take some 10 minutes longer to wash than in ordinary washers;

C. These high efficiency machines actually need to have special detergent. If you put

normal detergent in. it "over-suds." If you just cut back on the amount your clothes

don't get clean;

D. Fears exist that equipment will require more expensive servicing;

F. Side-loading washers make up less than 12% of the washers sold in the U.S. today;

5. Manufacturers evince an understanding that people don't want the mandate when

A. Whirlpool stated,

"Federal standards provide the only meaningful route to appropriately higher

energy efficiency for appliances, because consumers have historically shown a

disinclination to pay more for products that are more environmentally friendly.

That's true even when the total cost of owning and operating such products is less than

that of current models."-Whirlpool Release 4/23/97;

B. Industry stated,

"Selling it in the marketplace is easy if there's a standard in place. It's not a matter,

necessarily, of consumer acceptance."-Las Vegas Review-Journal 6/12/00

6. Against the people's will, the Department of Energy is rushing the mandate--

DOE Secretary Richardson has stated that DOE is "on a rush to establish an

environmental and energy self-sufficiency legacy."-New York Times 10/3/00

7. The poor, minorities, people living on fixed incomes, and seniors would suffer most.

Page 1 of 2

EE-RM-STD-98-440 COMMENT 73MM

EE-RM/STD-98-44o.--tf-1~~ M M 

The Facts on Proposed Clothes Washer & HVAC Mandates 

SITUATION 

1. The Department of Energy (DOE) proposed two new regulations on Thursday, October 5, 

2000 imposing mandates on 1. clothes washers, and 2. air conditioners & heat pumps. 

2. In a backroom deal without consumers or taxpayers groups represented, enviros and 

manufacturers cooked up the mandate that DOE has merely rubber-stamped. 

3. Roughly 81 million U.S. households have washers. There are roughly 10 million new units 

shipped per year in the U.S. 

4. John Q. Public and Jane Doe don't know that this mandate is being foisted upon them. 

ACTION 

Strong statement needed from Congress that the comment period regarding the DOE mandates 

needs to be extended by at least 120 days to ensure the public's voice is heard. 

REASONING 

This particular mandate is a perfect example of when the minimum comment period of 60 days 

is insufficient because: 

1. The rule directly affects so many households, 

2. John Q. Public and Jane Doe don't know about this mandate, 

3. The cost increases are so high, 

4. The products are available now and people do not buy them, 

A. Cost to average consumers estimated at $240 for clothes washers, $274 for 

residential central air conditioners, and $486 for residential heat pumps; 

B. A load of laundry will take some 10 minutes longer to wash than in ordinary washers; 

C. These high efficiency machines actually need to have special detergent. If you put 

normal detergent in. it "over-suds." If you just cut back on the amount your clothes 

don't get clean; 

D. Fears exist that equipment will require more expensive servicing; 

F. Side-loading washers make up less than 12% of the washers sold in the U.S. today; 

5. Manufacturers evince an understanding that people don't want the mandate when 

A. Whirlpool stated, 

"Federal standards provide the only meaningful route to appropriately higher 

energy efficiency for appliances, because consumers have historically shown a 

disinclination to pay more for products that are more environmentally friendly. 

That's true even when the total cost of owning and operating such products is less than 

that of current models."-Whirlpool Release 4/23/97; 

B. Industry stated, 

"Selling it in the marketplace is easy if there's a standard in place. It's not a matter, 

necessarily, of consumer acceptance."-Las Vegas Review-Journal 6/12/00 

6. Against the people's will, the Department of Energy is rushing the mandate--

DOE Secretary Richardson has stated that DOE is "on a rush to establish an 

environmental and energy self-sufficiency legacy."-New York Times 10/3/00 

7. The poor, minorities, people living on fixed incomes, and seniors would suffer most. 

Page 1 of2 
. ;..- .-. E.a\..g.'2 .. EE-RM/STD-98-4404'Z3#,1 -

DISPARATE ADVERSE IMPACTS

1. Regular, every-day people, a.k.a. consumers, are not equipped to read the Federal Register

and comment within 60 days of the publishing of a proposed rule in the way that special

interest groups with lobbyists and lawyers on retainer are.

2. This mandate is "unfair to minorities and the poor because, although they are least able to

pay, they must bear the greatest costs for adhering to those laws through ... higher prices,"

stated the non-partisan National Center for Public Policy Research.

3. 74% of environmental justice groups believe that government should be required to

determine that proposed environmental laws would not have a disproportionate impact on

minority and low-income communities before being adopted."-"Survey of environmental

Justice Groups," conducted by the National Center for Public Policy Research, Washington,

DC, July-August, 2000.

4. Disparate adverse impacts on A. the poor, B. people on fixed incomes, C. households that

wash less, D. have lower electricity costs, or E. fewer occupants, and F. senior citizens.

SOUND BITES

1. We should trust the American people to make their own choices and have control over their

own lives.

2. This is an example of"Big-government-elitists-supposedly-know-better-than-the-Americanpeople-what-is-good-for-the-American-people" thinking.

3. The federal government is getting into your bathroom (toilets), your laundry room (washing

machines), your bedroom (if, like many households, you have AC in your bedroom), and

every other room in your house (light bulbs).

4. Consumers would have fewer model choices and the free market would be damaged.

WASTE & ABUSE OF TAX DOLLARS

1. For pure public relations purposes-to push the wildly expensive, backroom mandate--the

Department of Energy is providing a free concert tour of country singers.

2. For pure public relations purposes, DOE gave away brand new Maytag Neptune washing

machines (over $1000 on the free market) in two cities--Bern, Kansas in 1997 and Reading,

Massachusetts (a suburb of Boston) in 2000.

3. The PR firm Leo Burnett handles PR for the washing machine give-away in Boston.

4. The proposed rule and HR 4977 would provide up to $60 million to each company making

appliances. HR4977 defines the manufacturing corporations as "taxpayers"--not the

consumers who would pay significantly more for the appliances.

5. These regulations were developed in a backroom deal without input from the public. The

"joint stakeholders" are the manufacturers and liberal environmental groups (NRDC, for

example). The most important "stakeholder" - the American Consumer and Taxpayer -

was left out of the process.

MIDNIGHT REGULATION & OCTOBER SURPRISE

As an "October Surprise," the Department of Energy waited five months until just before

Congress ends to publish the proposed mandate that DOE previously stated on May 23, 2000,

would be done in June 2000. In an attempt at "Midnight Regulation," the estimated date for

finalizing the rule has not changed and remains December 2000.

Page 2 of 2

EE-RM-STD-98-440 COMMENT 73MM

EE-RM/STD-98-440413·-A1!11. 

DISPARATE ADVERSE IMPACTS 

1. Regular, every-day people, a.k.a. consumers, are not equipped to read the Federal Register 

and comment within 60 days of the publishing of a proposed rule in the way that special 

interest groups with lobbyists and lawyers on retainer are. 

2. This mandate is "unfair to minorities and the poor because, although they are least able to 

pay, they must bear the greatest costs for adhering to those laws through ... higher prices," 

stated the non-partisan National Center for Public Policy Research. 

3. 74% of environmental justice groups believe that government should be required to 

determine that proposed environmental laws would not have a disproportionate impact on 

minority and low-income communities before being adopted."-"Survey of environmental 

Justice Groups," conducted by the National Center for Public Policy Research, Washington, 

DC, July-August, 2000. 

/) 

4. Disparate adverse impacts on A. the poor, B. people on fixed incomes, C. households that 

wash less, D. have lower electricity costs, or E. fewer occupants, and F. senior citizens. 

SOUND BITES 

1. We should trust the American people to make their own choices and have control over their 

own lives. 

2. This is an example of "Big-government-elitists-supposedly-know-better-than-the-Americanpeople-what-is-good-for-the-American-people" thinking. 

3. The federal government is getting into your bathroom (toilets), your laundry room (washing 

machines), your bedroom (if, like many households, you have AC in your bedroom), and 

every other room in your house (light bulbs). 

4. Consumers would have fewer model choices and the free market would be damaged. 

WASTE & ABUSE OF TAX DOLLARS 

1. For pure public relations purposes-to push the wildly expensive, backroom mandate--the 

Department of Energy is providing a free concert tour of country singers. 

2. For pure public relations purposes, DOE gave away brand new Maytag Neptune washing 

machines (over $1000 on the free market) in two cities--Bern, Kansas in 1997 and Reading, 

Massachusetts (a suburb of Boston) in 2000. 

3. The PR firm Leo Burnett handles PR for the washing machine give-away in Boston. 

4. The proposed rule and HR 4977 would provide up to $60 million to each company making 

appliances. HR4977 defines the manufacturing corporations as "taxpayers" --not the 

consumers who would pay significantly more for the appliances. 

5. These regulations were developed in a backroom deal without input from the public. The 

"joint stakeholders" are the manufacturers and liberal environmental groups (NRDC, for 

example). The most important "stakeholder" - the American Consumer and Taxpayer -

was left out of the process. 

MIDNIGHT REGULATION & OCTOBER SURPRISE 

As an "October Surprise," the Department of Energy waited five months until just before 

Congress ends to publish the proposed mandate that DOE previously stated on May 23, 2000, 

would be done in June 2000. In an attempt at "Midnight Regulation," the estimated date for 

finalizing the rule has not changed and remains December 2000. 

Page 2 of2 
EE-RM/STD-98-44Q0.o_ A/-/

Agreement on _Co unsenus Recomn ndationj to

The Department of Enerwy Reladtn to

Energv Efficiency Standads for Clothes Washers

And elaed Matters

Proposal

1. Clothes Wasler Energy Standard and Test o girsv P rocture The clothes washer energy

standards for standard class clothes washetp shall be 1.04 MEF in 1/1/2004 and 1.26 MEF in

1/1/2007. The energy test procedure will be revised to ensure that variability between test cloths

will not significanly affect remaining moist; re content (RMC) results. Additional clarifications

will also be made to test procedure.

2. r Energy Star levels shall be set as follows: Standard Class Clothes Washers--

1.26 MEF in 2001; 1.42 MEF in 2004; Refrigcrator/Preezers-10% better than the 2001

standard in 2001; change to 15% better than the 2001in 2004.

3. Tax Credit for the ProductioM of Enertv Efficient Clothes Washers and RefrleeratorFreeagty The credit shall provide for two energy efficiency tiers, each with separately

designated funds. There is $30 million in each designated fund per company per efficiency

tier. Cap of $60 million per company for the two funds or yearly cap with carry forward.

Annual total tax credit cannot exceed in any taxable year 2% of corporate gross Tevenucs as

determined by average of 3 prior years.

Standard Class Clothes Washers: Two tiers coterminous 2001-2006; $50 per unit for

products manufactured with a 1.26 MEF and $100 per unit for products manufactured with

a 1.42 MEF, increasing to 1.5 MEF in 2004. Includes residential-style "coin-operated"

washers.

Refrigerators: First tier effective in 2001, $50 per unit for products manufactured 10% above 2001

minimum efficiency standard. Credit runas through 2004. Second tier also effective in 2001 and runs

through 2006. It is $100 for products manufactured 15% above the 2001 minimum efficiency

standard. Credits apply to automatic defrost refrigerator-freezers only, at 16.5 cubic feet internal

volume and above.

4. ountarv Ind4st Water Proram Water factor reporting shall be part of a voluntary

industry sponsored program. AIAM members agree to publicly disclose through AHAM,

water factors for each model that meets Energy Star/Tax Credit NMF levels, starting

sometime in calendar year 2001. In calendar year 2002 and each year thereafter, industrywide shipment weighted average water factors for units shipped in the previous year shall be

reported by AHAM. Water factor calculations will use appendix I water factor through 2003

and will use appendix l1 thereaftcr. Startng in 2007, AHAM members agIse to report water

factor for all models. AHAM will sponsor water conferenc.

-~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

EE-RM-STD-98-440 COMMENT 73MM

Ageemtnt on QJplWIlS l!sougpendatioas, to 

I!& Department oflpeI'v RtladPI to 

hem Elfislasy Stagd!IP' lOT C10tiaes Wash en 

APdjtelated. Matters 

Proposal 

1. goUt" Washer EDem Stapdard aDd I hem Tefl Prutdpn The clothes washer energy 

standards for standard class elothes washet~~ sball be 1.04 MBF in 1/1/2004 and 1.26 MEF in 

1/112007. The energy test pmc:edurc will be:revised to ensure that variability between test cloths 

wiU not sigpinQQJly affect remaining moist·.:I{~ contant (RMC) results. Additional clarifications 

w:ill also be made to teat prcx;cd.ure. 

2. EP&DD' Star Energy Star levela shall be set as follows: Standard Class Clothes Washers-~ 

1.26 MEF in 2001; 1.42 MEF in 2004; R.efrigcmorJPreezers-lO% better than the 2001 

standard in 200 1; change to 15% better than the 2001 in 2004-

3. Iu: Credit for the Production of Eoem Efficle!t ClOthes Washers apd Befriwator~ 

FreYID The credit Ihall provide for two· energy efficiency tiers, each with separately 

designated funds. There i& $30 million in each desiiDated :fund per company per efficiency 

tier. Cap of $60 million per company for the two funds or yearly cap with can)' fOlWard. 

Annuall0tal tax credit cannot exceed in any taxable year 2% of corporate gross tevenues as 

determined. by average of:3 prior years. 

Standard Class Clothes Washers: TWo tiers coterminous 2001·2006; $50 per unit for 

products manufilctw'co with a 1.26 MEr and $100 per unit (or produots manllf'actured with 

a 1.42 MEF. incrca.sil)g to 1.5 MBP' in 2004. hlt:ludes residential-style "eom-operated" 

washers. 

Refrigerators: First tier effective in 2001. SSO pet unit for products manufactured 10% above 2001 

IPinimurn efficiency standard. Credit nms through 2004. Second tier also effective in 2001 and runs 

through 2006. It is $100 for products manufactured 151/0 above the 2001 minimum. efficiency 

standard. Credits apply to automatic deftost t'efrigentor-ireezen only, at 16.5 cubic feet internal 

volume and abo'Ve. 

4. l!Slulltaly bdustry Water Prognm Water faGtor reporting shall be part of a voluntary 

industry spolUOrcc1 program. AllAM members apee to publicly disclose through AHAM. 

Water factors for each model that me. Energy Star/fax Credit MEF levels. starting 

sometime in calendar year 2001. In calendar year 2002 and each year then:afte.r, industIywide shipment wmshted a~enlg8 watflt factO!! for units shipped in the pTevious year shall be 

reported by .AHAM. Water faetor oalculatiOllS will use appendix 1 water factor through 2003 

and Will usc appcmdix]1 thereafter. starting in 2007, AHAM Ulcmbers agree to report water 

D.ctor for all modela. AHAM will sponsor water couf'cre:ucc. 

1