June 28, 2010 Ms. Brenda Edwards-Jones U.S. Department of Energy Building Technologies Program Mailstop EE-2J 1000 Independence Avenue, SW Washington, DC 20585 Re: Framework Document – Energy Conservation Standards for Commercial Refrigeration Equipment (Docket No. EERE-2010-BT-STD-0003/RIN 1904-AC19) Dear Ms. Edwards-Jones: These comments are submitted by the Air-Conditioning, Heating and Refrigeration Institute (AHRI) in response to the U.S. Department of Energy’s (DOE) notice appearing in the Federal Register

on May 6, 2010 announcing the availability of a framework document for commercial refrigeration equipment.

AHRI is the trade association representing manufacturers of heating, cooling, water heating, and commercial refrigeration equipment. More than 300 members strong, AHRI is an internationally recognized advocate for the industry, and develops standards for and certifies the performance of many of the products manufactured by our members. In North America, the annual output of the HVACR industry is worth more than $20 billion. In the United States alone, our members employ approximately 130,000 people, and support some 800,000 dealers and contractors. AHRI has reviewed the framework document and would like to offer the following comments:

Scope of Rulemaking

AHRI and its members were very surprised to find out that the scope of rulemaking that DOE is initiating with this framework document includes commercial refrigeration products (i.e.; ice cream freezers, self-contained products without doors, and remote condensing products) for which DOE promulgated energy conservation standards just a year ago (January 2009).

EERE-2010-BT-STD-0003 1.3.008

AHRI Comments – Framework Document on Commercial Refrigeration Equipment June 28, 2010

Page 2 of 7

AHRI understands that the Energy Policy Act of 2005 (EPACT 2005), directs DOE to issue a final rule by January 1, 2013, to determine whether energy conservation standards for commercial refrigeration equipment should be amended. However, it was never the intent of Congress to ask DOE to start a rulemaking on products for which energy conservation standards were just established and are not yet effective1

. This makes absolutely no sense.

The legislative language on commercial refrigeration equipment contained in EPACT 2005 is based on a Consensus Agreement reached by AHRI and other stakeholders in 2005 (see highlighted text in attached Exhibit A

). It is clear by looking at the attached agreement that the January 1, 2013, rulemaking deadline was directed at the self-contained refrigerators and freezers with doors for which energy conservation standards were enacted by EPACT 2005 and not at the other commercial refrigeration products. Somehow, the January 1, 2013 rulemaking deadline was misapplied to all commercial refrigeration products when the Consensus Agreement was translated into legislative language.

AHRI understands that DOE must follow EPACT 2005. However, we also believe that DOE has the statutory authority to decide whether to engage in a full rulemaking or not. DOE’s reasoning that it must do a full analysis to decide whether the energy conservation standards must be amended is flawed. In this particular case, some of the standards that DOE is thinking of amending are not yet effective. In fact, these standards will not be effective until January 1, 2012. Therefore we wonder how DOE could possibly and effectively assess if the standards need to be amended when the impact of the current standards are not yet known and will not be known until few years after 2012. What DOE intends to do is unprecedented in the history of the appliance standards process and should be abandoned. We urge DOE to focus the rulemaking on self-contained commercial refrigerators and freezers with doors only.

Standby Mode and Off Mode Standards

AHRI agrees with DOE’s conclusions that “off mode” and “standby mode” conditions of operations do not apply to the equipment covered by this rulemaking. Commercial refrigeration equipment operates continuously and as such are never in “off mode” or “standby mode”. However, besides this technical argument, we believe that the Energy Policy and Conservation Act (EPCA) does not give DOE the authority to regulate “standby mode” and “off mode” energy for commercial equipment in general. The Energy Independence and Security Act (EISA) amended section 42 USC 6295 of EPCA which specifically deals with consumer products (i.e.; residential equipment) and not commercial products. Consequently, this topic is in our opinion outside the scope of this rulemaking. 1 The effective date of the energy conservation standards for ice cream freezer, self-contained commercial refrigeration equipment without doors and remote condensing refrigeration equipment is January 1, 2012

EERE-2010-BT-STD-0003 1.3.008

AHRI Comments – Framework Document on Commercial Refrigeration Equipment June 28, 2010

Page 3 of 7

Equipment Issues

During the last rulemaking on commercial refrigeration equipment2, DOE concluded that self-contained service over the counter products medium and low temperatures (SOC.SC.M &L) were subject to the energy conservation standards enacted under the Energy Policy and Conservation Act of 2005 (EPACT 2005). However, several manufacturers expressed concerns that the EPACT 2005 energy conservation standards were too stringent and couldn’t be met by SOC products. A manufacturer filed for a waiver with the DOE Office of Hearings and Appeals (OHA). However, the waiver request was denied on the grounds that the energy conservation standards were enacted by Congress and not promulgated by DOE through a rulemaking. Since then, AHRI and other stakeholders approached the U.S. Congress for a legislative fixe. The proposal developed by AHRI establishes an energy conservation standard for the “SOC.SC.M” product class as a function of the total display area (TDA). We understand that the proposal (see Exhibit B

) will be introduced as an amendment to the energy bill currently being considered by the U.S. Senate. We urge DOE to establish a product class for SOC.SC.Medium and Low temperatures.

Test Procedures

AHRI supports DOE’s intent to adopt the 2008 version of AHRI 1200 as the federal test procedures for commercial refrigeration equipment. We also understand that DOE is considering further amendments to the test procedures. While AHRI is not opposed to additional changes, we urge DOE to work with industry and other stakeholders collaboratively on this matter. As such, we encourage DOE to participate in the AHRI 1200 standard project committee which is currently working on future amendments to the standard.

Market Assessment

In general, AHRI agrees with DOE’s approach to characterizing the structure of the commercial industry and market. However, is assessing the market, DOE needs to also look at the increasingly growing market of used commercial refrigeration equipment. According to a recent survey, a commercial refrigeration product is sold seven times before it is removed from the market. The recent economic downturn has probably made the situation even worse. As such, we recommend that the used market be quantitatively and qualitatively characterized.

2 74FR1092, January 9, 2009

EERE-2010-BT-STD-0003 1.3.008

AHRI Comments – Framework Document on Commercial Refrigeration Equipment June 28, 2010

Page 4 of 7

Furthermore, AHRI agrees with DOE’s proposed product classes. However, with respect to SOC products, we ask that DOE characterize the energy consumption with respect to the total display area (TDA) of the case and not its volume.

Technology Assessment

The technology options listed by DOE are well known to the industry and most of them have been used by manufacturers for a long time. These design options are not meaningful as stand-alone improvements as systems’ efficiency gains are usually the result of combining several technology options. However, we would like to stress that the energy efficiency benefits, if any, of combinations of these design options are not simply additive. Assessment of the combined benefit of multiple design options requires a rigorous analysis and simulation of the total system in which they are employed.

Engineering Analysis

AHRI fully understands that the engineering analysis is very complex and does not expect DOE to be exactly right. However, the analysis is a critical component of the rulemaking process and extreme care must be taken to obtain credible results. Below is some feedback on the engineering analysis that we feel should seriously be considered.

The use of a design option approach to determine the relationship between manufacturing selling price and energy consumption, although not perfect, is acceptable. However, DOE should validate the cost-efficiency curves against actual retail sales prices. Focusing on retail sale prices instead of attempting to build up from estimates of manufacturer costs and the several markups in the supply chain to the end user will improve the accuracy of the analysis.

Use of Design Option Approach

As mentioned above, we urge DOE to focus its analysis on retail prices directly. When multiple markups (manufacturer, distributor, dealer and contractor) are estimated errors are compounded.

Manufacturer Prices

DOE should limit its analysis to technologies available to all manufacturers in the industry. Proprietary designs and technologies should not be considered in this rulemaking

Proprietary Designs

We urge the Department to fully consider the impact of various climate change bills being debated on Capitol Hill. Depending on which version prevails, these

Outside Regulatory Changes Affecting the Engineering Analysis

EERE-2010-BT-STD-0003 1.3.008

AHRI Comments – Framework Document on Commercial Refrigeration Equipment June 28, 2010

Page 5 of 7

bills will lead to severe curtailment of HFCs starting as early as 2012 or as late as 2019. The Waxman legislation for example would set an HFC cap at 370 MMT CO2e in 2012, three years before this rule takes effect, some 20% below estimated industry demand. On the other hand, higher energy efficiency refrigeration systems require more refrigerant charge because of larger evaporators and condensers. Therefore, it is imperative that DOE carefully study the impact of climate change legislation on the availability and price of HFC refrigerants as there is a real possibility that price will skyrocket and that not enough refrigerants will be available to meet the new energy conservation standards.

Markups for Equipment Price determination

Based on our experience, equipment markups are difficult to estimate and often result in retail prices that are lower than what is observed in the market place. As such, we recommend, to the extent possible, that DOE complement its analysis by surveying the dealer/contractor base to estimate the retail sale price at various efficiencies.

Life Cycle Cost and Payback Period Analysis

AHRI agrees with DOE’s approach to use average electricity process.. We also agree with the use the most recent available edition of EIA’s Annual Energy Outlook to estimate current and future energy prices.

Energy Prices

It is incorrect to assume that changes in maintenance, repair, and installation will be negligible for more efficient equipment. For energy consumption levels that require indoor or outdoor brushless direct current motors or multi-capacity compressors, DOE should survey parts distributors to find the price difference between standard PSC and ECM motors, and the difference between 2-stage and single stage compressors. The dealers usually double their cost on parts when they invoice equipment owners. Furthermore, the phaseout of HCFC-22 and the phase down of HFCs that the U.S. Congress is likely to implement in the near future will undoubtedly have an impact on the price of refrigerants. DOE cannot assume that the price to service the refrigeration system will remain constant over time and that it will not change with efficiency. A shown in the engineering analysis, one of the most effective ways to improve efficiency is to increase the size of the evaporator and condenser coils. Bigger coils require more refrigerant to initially charge the system and to service it during its lifetime.

Maintenance, Repair, and Installation Costs

Equipment Lifetime

EERE-2010-BT-STD-0003 1.3.008

AHRI Comments – Framework Document on Commercial Refrigeration Equipment June 28, 2010

Page 6 of 7

AHRI believes that the average equipment lifetime is approximately 10 years as used by DOE in the previous rulemaking.

Manufacturer Impact Analysis

DOE should examine the impact of the rule on all manufacturers of different product classes. This should include manufacturers of self-contained refrigeration systems and display cases. In addition, DOE should assess the impact of the rule on component suppliers such as compressor, motor and valve manufacturers. Finally, DOE must do a separate analysis to assess the impact on dealers, distributors and contractors.

Manufacturer Subgroup Analysis

There are several legislative and regulatory activities that would significantly burden manufacturers of refrigeration equipment. Among the federal regulatory activities are the phaseout of HCFCs in 2010 and the DOE energy conservation standards for walk in refrigerators and freezers. On the legislative side, the climate change bills being debated in Congress could have a significant negative impact on the availability and price of HFC refrigerants and therefore on manufacturers.

Cumulative Regulatory Burden

In addition to the federal rulemaking on walk-ins, the state of California is currently working on new regulations as part of Title 24 that will most likely establish new prescriptive design requirements on commercial refrigeration equipment in 2011. Other states on the west coast are watching California very closely and are likely to implement similar regulations in the near future This additional regulatory burden on manufacturers should be accounted for in the DOE analysis. Furthermore, several states have enacted their own climate change legislation to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. For example, the state of California developed regulations that will limit greenhouse gas emissions to the 1990 levels by year 2020. Among the measures established by CARB are provisions to reduce the use of high global warming potential refrigerants such as HFCs in refrigeration and air conditioning equipment. CARB will implement these regulations in 2011.

Monetization of Emissions Reductions

The Department indicates that it is considering taking into account a monetary benefit of CO2 emission reductions associated with this rulemaking. This is not the first time the Department has considered the benefits to the nation of potential CO2 emissions reductions in an appliance efficiency standards rulemaking, and we agree that it is an important factor to consider. The

EERE-2010-BT-STD-0003 1.3.008

AHRI Comments – Framework Document on Commercial Refrigeration Equipment June 28, 2010

Page 7 of 7

Department has no statutory responsibility, however, to establish a monetary value for potential environmental benefits of appliance standards options. Moreover, the Department should not allow evaluation of environmental impacts to negate or moot what has always been, and should remain, the core analysis in appliance standards rulemakings, i.e.

consumer payback and life cycle cost analysis.

There is currently no consensus on any single estimate of the value of CO2 emissions, and therefore DOE should not indulge in speculation to determine a value when it has no statutory obligation to do so. Congress is now engaged in debating a possible “cap and trade” program for the United States; the size of the allowance cap first set by such legislation or by implementing regulations, and the pace of reduction of the emission allowances will largely determine the unit price or value of CO2 emissions reductions. It would be an arbitrary decision on the part of the Department to rely on valuations identified in the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) or valuations used in the European Union (EU) “cap and trade” program when the United States has not yet set an emissions cap itself. However, if DOE decides to estimate the monetary value of the CO2 emission reductions, DOE must also estimate additional CO2 emissions resulting from the production of the more efficient units. This would include the mining and production of increased volume of raw materials, OEM factory retooling, additional trucks needed to ship larger units, and additional warehouse space needed for larger units among others. AHRI appreciates the opportunity to provide these comments. If you have any questions regarding this submission, please do not hesitate to contact me. Sincerely,

Karim Amrane Vice President, Regulatory & Research Tel: 703/524-8800 ext.307 Email: kamrane@ahrinet.org

EERE-2010-BT-STD-0003 1.3.008

Final CRMD AgreementJanuary 21,2005

Agreement on Let:dslative and Regulatorv Strategy for ObtainingEnergy Efficiency Standards for

Commercial Refrigerators. Freezers. and Refrigerator FreezersAnd Related Matters

Januarv 21. 2005

This Agreement memorializes the commitments made by the undersigned representatives of theorganizations (the "Joint Stakeholders")regarding the energy efficiency standards forcommercial refrigerators, freezers, and refrigerator freezers and other related matters affectingthese commitments. In light of the regulatory structure enacted by the Energy Policy Act of1992, that authorizes the promulgation of energy efficiency standards by the Department ofEnergy ("Department"), the Joint Stakeholdersagree to pursue a multi-pronged approachdesigned to achieve Congressional or regulatory enactment of the desired standards.

1. The Joint Stakeholderswill jointly submit and in good faith, advocate that Congress enactthe attached proposal (Attachment 1) for amending the Energy Policy and ConservationAct as it relates to commercial refrigerators, freezers, and refrigerator/freezers. Theagreed to standards levels in kilowatt hours per day for self-contained refrigerators,freezers and refrigerator-freezers effective January 1,2010 are:

Refrigerators with solid doors:Refrigerators with transparent doors:Freezers with solid doors:Freezers with transparent doors:Refrigerators/freezerswith solid doors:

0.10V + 2.040.12V + 3.34OAOV+ 1.380.75V + 4.10

the greater of:0.27 AV - 0.71 or0.70

For equipment designed for pull-down temperature applications (defined to becommercial refrigerators with doors that when fully loaded with 12ounce beverage cansat 90 degrees F, can cool these beverages to an average stable temperature of 38 degreesFin 12 hours or less), a standard in kilowatt hours per day will be set as follows,effective Jan. 1,2010:

Refrigerators with transparent doors: 0.126V + 3.51

2. Concurrently, the joint stakeholderswill jointly approach Energy Star to advocate to thepromulgation of appropriate modifications to the Energy Star refrigerator/freezerspecification so that the specification does not call for energy use less than zero at verysmall sizes.

3. Concurrently, the Joint Stakeholderswill jointly submit and advocate that the Departmentadopt a consensus recommendation to the Department to adopt the above standard levels,provided DOE agrees that such a rulemaking can take place without classifying this

1

EXHIBIT A

EERE-2010-BT-STD-0003 1.3.008

Final CRMD AgreementJanuary 21,2005

equipment as "covered" until a final rule is issued. These consensus recommendationsshall address all of the statutory criteria that the Department is required to take intoaccount in promulgating energy efficiency standards for covered equipment.

4. Concurrently, the Joint Stakeholderswill jointly submit and advocate that the Departmentinitiate a rulemaking to set standards for ice-cream freezers, self-contained cabinetswithout doors, and remote condensing products (solid door, transparent door and cabinetswithout doors). The parties will attempt to develop consensus recommendations whichshall address all of the statutory criteria that the Department is required to take intoaccount in promulgating energy efficiency standards for covered equipment.

5. The Joint Stakeholders agree that:. For self-contained commercial refrigerators, freezers, and refrigerator/freezers for

which energy efficiency standards have been agreed to under paragraph 1 of thisAgreement, the initial test procedure shall be ASHRAE standard 117-2002. For self-contained commercial refrigerators and freezers with doors covered by the standardsadopted in February 2002 by the California Energy Commission, the ratingtemperatures will be the integrated average temperature of 38 F (+/- 2 F) forrefrigerator compartments and 0 F (+/- 2 F) for freezer compartments. For otherproducts the Department will decide on the appropriate rating temperatures;

. When the ASHRAE test procedures are revised (or another ANSI-approvedprocedure per the paragraph below), the Department would have 6 months to act orthe new test procedures would automatically take effect. However, ifthe Departmentdetermines that more than 6 months is needed to review the new test procedures, theDepartment could, through a notice in the Federal Register, extend the review periodby an additional 12 months; and

. When and if another test procedure is ANSI approved, the Department shall reviewthe relative strengths and weaknesses of the new test procedure relative to the above-referenced ASHRAE procedure and based on this review, shall select one of these testprocedures for subsequent use in the standards program. If test procedures arechanged, the provisions ofEPCA section 323(e) shall apply.

6. The Joint Stakeholders agree that:. For products for which initial standards are stated in paragraph 1 of this Agreement,

the Department shall publish a final rule by January 1,2013 to determine if thestandards established under paragraph 1 of this Agreement should be amended. Anyamended standards shall apply to equipment manufactured three years after the finalamended standard is published unless the Department determines, as part of itsrulemaking, that three years is inadequate. However, the effective date of theamended standards may not be greater than five years after the final amendedstandard is published;

. A second subsequent revision of the standard would be issued three years after theprior amended standard takes effect; and

. In the event that the Department does not issue a final rule on schedule, preemptionwould end two years after the scheduleddate for a final rule, but when/if the

2

EXHIBIT A

EERE-2010-BT-STD-0003 1.3.008

Final CRMD AgreementJanuary 21,2005

Department subsequently issues a final rule, the preemption provisions agreed to bythe parties in section seven of this agreementwill again apply.

7. The Joint Stakeholdersagree that:. The preemption language in the conference agreement on the Energy Policy Act of

2003 will apply. This calls for preemption on date of enactment by Congress or finalrule by the Department, except that any state standards enacted prior to these dateswill not be preempted until the federal standard takes effect.

. However, for commercial refrigerators and freezers, if the CEC adopts new standardsby March 31, 2005, these new standards will not be preempted until the new federalstandard takes effect.

. For remote products or for other commercial refrigeration products that theDepartment sets initial efficiency levels, the conference bill language shall apply --state pre-emption will begin at the time of the final rule publication except any statesthat adopt standards prior to this date will not be preempted until the federal standardtakes effect.

. Any commercial refrigerator, freezer, and refrigerator-freezer for which there arefederal standards, the Department shall require manufacturers to certify, through anindependent testing or certification program nationally recognized in the UnitedStates, that such commercial refrigerator, freezer, and refrigerator-freezer meets theapplicable standard. The Department shall make best efforts to encourage theestablishment of at least two such independent testing and certification programs. Aspart of this certification, information on equipment energy use and interior volumeshall be made available to the Department.

8. ARI agrees to develop and implementno later than January 1,2010, a certificationprogram for commercial refrigerators, freezers, and refrigerator freezers covered by thisagreement. Such program will make data publicly available including the following:manufacturer, model number, refrigerator volume, freezer volume, and kWh/day (usingthe Federal test procedures in place). The ARI certification program will include similarre-rating and penalty provisions as are in the current ARI certification program forunitary air conditioners.

9. The Joint Stakeholders agree not to attempt to overturn or revise or to file or support anylegal or legislative challenge to the efficiency standards established in paragraph 1 andthe final rule(s) that adopt the proposed standards addressed in paragraph 3. The JointStakeholders agree to support the Department in a manner as each one deems to bereasonable and appropriate in defending any legal, legislative, or administrative challengeto a final rule that adopts the proposed standard.

10. The Joint Stakeholders commit to work together, in good faith, to advance the legislativeand regulatory objectives of this Agreement. Each Joint Stakeholderwill respond ingood faith to reasonable requests by other Joint Stakeholders for joint action to advancethese legislative and regulatory objectives.

3

EXHIBIT A

EERE-2010-BT-STD-0003 1.3.008

Final CRMD AgreementJanuary 21,2005

11. Consistent with their goal of enacting the energy efficiency standards described above, asof January 1,2005, the Joint Stakeholderswill not advocate or pursue on their own orthrough other parties and will not encourage or support the development or adoption ofstate or local energy efficiency standards for commercial refrigerators, freezers, andrefrigerator-freezers that are inconsistent with the Proposal including the definitions,standard levels, and effective dates.

12. The Joint Stakeholders agree to work together to advocate for adequate funding fromCongress for the Department to fulfill its enforcement and standard setting obligations.

13. The Joint Stakeholders will cooperate with each other in the preparation of press releasesand public statements in support of the legislative and regulatory objectives set forth inthis Agreement.

14.Nothing in this Agreement is intended to inhibit in any way efforts by individualstakeholders to research, develop, or market products to standards that differ from thosecontemplated by this Agreement, provided such products are in compliance withapplicable laws and regulations. Nothing in this Agreement is intended to direct anytechnical or product design approach to achieving efficiency standards and the partiesshall not take any act to establish any such common approach.

15. This Agreement is hereby agreed to, in counterparts, by the undersigned JointStakeholders. To the fullest extent permitted by applicable law, this Agreement binds theundersigned Joint Stakeholders, their employees, their agents, and any successors andwill take effect when all signatures are affixed.

16. The term of this Agreement is from the date of signing until December 31, 2006. Threemonths prior to the expiration of this Agreement, the parties agree to meet to discusswhether some or all of the provisions should be extended. Not withstanding the above, ifCongress enacts legislation in accordance with this Agreement, all parties agree that theywill take no action to overturn or revise said legislation without mutual agreement of theother parties.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, each of the parties has caused this Agreement to be executedon its behalf by its duly authorized representative hereinafter identified.

4

EXHIBIT A

EERE-2010-BT-STD-0003 1.3.008

Air-Conditioning and RefrigerationInstitute, Inc.

BY:~William G. Sutton, President

Date: March 9. 2005

Barker Company, LTD

'By: c--"~'''''' -'Michael Kauk VP Enttinecring

Date: Qlf3l/05

Beverage- Airffyler Refrigeration

By:'OhnM. Mandyck, Vice President

Government & International RelationsDate: January 30. 2005

COD~llefiigeratnr,

~?7~Bv'

J . .JoHr-1 .~C~IS.T

fM&.

Date: J It I(!)~I f

Hill PHOENIX

By:~4- 0k:. C. HOifl~1'\d

Date:/6s/os . .

I I

Final CRMD AgreementJanuary 21, 2005

American Council for EnergyEfficient Economy

1,1 .

~R1\By:

Natural Resources Defense Council

. . . 1;/' LL '"By. )j-- /3 ,

David 'E.Goldstein, Energy ProgramDirector

Date: II //~ lrtl)/

::Pli.ttJ~1JJ;prOjectAndrew deLaski, Executivc Director

Dme:4~

,11./' ~

'By~ . ..(~t allahan, sident

Date: -4k-/dS-Northeast Energy EfficiencyPartnerships, Inc.

By:

Date: /1~Z/~ 5

5

EXHIBIT A

EERE-2010-BT-STD-0003 1.3.008

Hussmann Corporation/1 1" /'

By: ;:toVLJtI+- l)tfLLJoM Behr,P.E.V.P.Engineering,GlobalRetailSolutions

Date: February 4.2005

, Executive Vice President

Date: February 3. 2005

McCall Refrigeration

Structural Concepts

By:

Final CRMD AgreementJanuary 21,2005

CaliforniaFAt'7eaCO~By: Q kt .

Jackie PfannenstiChcrir,Energy Efficiency Com~ittee

Date: ~k1los

California Energy Commission

By:

Date: :1... (1- J.oo~-

Environmental Nortbeast

~/~By:' '/L.I'aniel L. Sosland, Exe tiv

Director

Date:t/;, y;~,

6

EXHIBIT A

EERE-2010-BT-STD-0003 1.3.008

EXHIBIT B

EERE-2010-BT-STD-0003 1.3.008

CAM10157 Joint Staff Amendment S.L.C.

AMENDMENT NO. _ Calendar No. _

Purpose: To modify a provision relating to commercial refrig­erators, freezers, and refrigerator-freezers.

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES-lllth Cong., 2d Sess.

8.3059

To improve the energy efficiency of appliances, lighting, andbuildings, and for other purposes.

Referred to the Committee on ----- andordered to be printed

Ordered to lie on the table and to be printed

AMENDMENT intended to be proposed by _

Viz:

1 At the appropriate place, insert the following':

2 Section 342 (c) of the Energy Policy and Conservation

3 Act (42 U.S.C. 6313(c)) is amended-

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

(1) in paragraph (1)-

(A) by redesignating subparagraph (C) as

subparagraph (E)i and

(B) by inserting after subparagraph (B)

the following:

"(C) The term 'service over the counter,

self-contained, medium temperature commercial

EXHIBIT B

EERE-2010-BT-STD-0003 1.3.008

CAlVIl0157 Joint Staff Amendment S,L,C,

2

1 refrigerator' or '(SOC-SC-M)' means a medium

2 temperature commercial refrigerator-

3 "(i) with a self-contained condensing

4 unit and equipped with sliding or hinged

5 doors in the back intended for use by sales

6 personnel, and with glass or other trans-

7 parent material in the front for displaying

8 merchandise; and

9 "(ii) that has a height not greater

10 than 66 inches and is intended to serve as

11 a counter for transactions between sales

12 personnel and customers,

13 "(D) The term 'TDA' means the total dis-

14 play area (ft2 ) of the refrigerated case, as de-

15 fined in AHRI Standard 1200.";

16 (2) by redesignating paragraphs (4) and (5) as

17 paragraphs (5) and (6), respectively; and

18 (3) by inserting after paragraph (3) the fol-

19 lowing:

20 "(4) Each SOC-SC-M manufactured on or after

21 January 1, 2012, shall have a total daily energy con-

22 sumption (in kilowatt hours per day) of not more

23 than 0.6 x TDA + 1.0.".