ms. noll: thank you. i do believe there are more cost effective pathways to achieve greater energy savings that have yet to come. i begin by just, as i stated in my opening remarks, the rule that was finalized just last year for commercial rooftop units, you know, represented the largest energy saving standards, single standard in agency history. and that was the third time that that standard had been revised. and while this is going to deliver huge consumer and environmental value, it was not -- nowhere near the most energy efficient technology that's commercially available. it just suggests that there is still room to improve and i would also note that, as i mentioned in the -- in my opening remarks, that the forthcoming report from -- report looks at the rules that will be up for revision in the next eight years and has shown that the energy savings opportunity from those rules will exceed that of which of those that were finalized in the last eight years. again, just further suggesting tha

ms. noll for your statement. at this thailand time i'd like to introduce mr. kevin cosgriff who is the president and ceo of the national electrical manufacturers association and thanks for being with us. and you are recognized for five minutes. >> thank you mr. chairman. ranking member rush and members of the subcommittee for having us today. i am a he the president and ceo of the national electrical manufacturers association some nearly 400 members that provide virtually everything in the electrical world. i appreciate this tune to talk about epka with the subcommittee. we have a central position in this dialogue given that 27 of the 63 covered product are made by nema members and an additional 30 products products contain components made by nema members. i have three main points i would like to make today. first, there are diminishing energy savings returns to multiple rule makings on the same product. that's not saying that we don't believe in energy savings. we're just saying there is dimi

ms. noll, from listening to some of the people sitting next to you on the panel and some of my colleagues on the other side, you'd think that the standards process has suddenly become far more contentious than it used to be. in my opening statement i talked about the fact that the standard setting process has always yielded some controversy from one industry to another, and that's not to say that complaints or controversies weren't always important or even valid. but i just see some contention as inevitable part of any meaningful standard setting process no matter how well it functions. so while not every standard can be negotiated, my sense is that there has been more consensus than ever before and that every industry trade represented here today has been involved and likely benefited from that consensus. so my question is, do you agree with me that there actually seems to have been more consensus in the standards setting process over the past eight years and of the rules finalized in the las

ms. noll, you did mention in the discussion with my colleague mr. rush that we should -- the confusing thing is we're not talking from a baseline of families. what is a family? what is a cost? i think ms. miller mentioned it. her cost and a two-family household is different than a family -- i'm one of seven kids -- of nine. grew up aloft different cost, a lot different projected savings. don't you think that if we're going to have this debate that the department of energy ought to help us define what is a family, what is a savings, and to have part of that transparency? >> thank you. i would say the department of energy does take into account many perspectives. >> but don't you think they should help define this so we could have a better, accurate discussion of what the savings are and who they're saving? this amorphous savings is being disputed by economists based upon real data and real numbers. >> as many of the colleagues that i work with, we strive to find -- get better data -- >> the que

ms. noll, from listening to some of the people silting next to you on the panel and some of my colleagues on the other side, you'd think that the standards process has suddenly become far more contentious than it used to be. in my opening statement i talked about the fact that the standard setting process has always yielded some controversy from one industry to another and that's not to say that complaints or controversies weren't always important or even valid. but i just see some contention as inevitable part of any meaningful standard setting process no matter how well it functions. so while not every standard can be negotiated my sense is that there has been more consensus than ever before and that every industry trade represented here today has been involved and likely benefited from that consensus. so my question is, do you agree with me that there actually seems to have been more consensus in the standards setting process over the past eight years and of the rules finalized in the last

ms. noll: thank you for the opportunity to share the perspective of the natural resources defense council on national energy efficiency standards set by the department of energy for many household appliances and commercial products. this program sets dependable minimum levels of energy efficiency that all americans can count on to reduce their utility bills, the carbon pollution that harms human health while promoting new job opportunities. i'm the legislative director for the energy program at nrdc. nrdc has long supported nrning efficiency standards and we're far from alone. we've successfully worked alongside many groups, including nema, and aham here today and support was reiterated in a recren op-ed authored with the national association of manufacturers. let's not forget the initial law establishing standards was signed by president ronald reagan, then expanded and approved with broad, bipartisan support in laws signed by presidents george h.w. and w. bush. why is there strong support fo

so not only does it cost more to run, ms. noll, now we're having -- we're wasting water, which this is a big issue nowadays. we always talk about water savings. especially let's go to california. let's talk about california for a second. they're supposed to run, waste hot water, and let it run 1/4. this is the manual that comes for dishwashers now that says that. refrigerators. let me use refrigerators real quick. refrigerators in 2008, average whirlpool refrigerator cost $999. that same unit comparable today is $1,299. energy cost, also up. now, these are two major appliances. we're talking about refrigerator. we're talking about a dishwasher. where's the huge savings? d.o.e. and the argument on all these energy-efficient appliances are always out there talking about huge savings. and the american people think it's huge. and yet i gave you two examples of -- >> hold on, mr. chairman. >> gentleman's time has expired. thank you. seeing no further witnesses seeking time the chair asks unanimous consent to enter for the record a mult