[Federal Register Volume 59, Number 188 (Thursday, September 29, 1994)]
[Unknown Section]
[Page 0]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 94-24127]


[[Page Unknown]]

[Federal Register: September 29, 1994]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy
[Case No. CD-001]

 

Energy Conservation Program for Consumer Products; Denial of 
Miele Appliance Inc.'s Application for Interim Waiver and Publishing of 
the Company's Petition for Waiver From the Existing Department of 
Energy Clothes Dryer Test Procedure

AGENCY: Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, Department of 
Energy.

SUMMARY: Today's notice publishes a letter denying an Interim Waiver to 
Miele Appliance Inc. (Miele) from the existing Department of Energy 
(DOE or Department) clothes dryer test procedure for its clothes dryer 
models T1515A, T1520, T1565CA, and T1570C with a reverse tumble feature 
which Miele contends allows it to use a smaller capacity drum for a 
larger clothes dryer load. The existing clothes dryer test procedure 
does not have any recognition of the reverse tumble design feature.
    Today's notice also publishes a ``Petition for Waiver'' from Miele. 
Miele's Petition for Waiver requests DOE to grant relief from the DOE 
clothes dryer test procedure relating to its clothes dryer models 
T1515A, T1520, T1565CA, and T1570C. The appendices to Miele's letter 
were not suitable for publication in the Federal Register and are 
available upon request from the contact person listed below.
    Miele seeks to revise the definitions of compact and standard size 
clothes dryers in the test procedure. DOE is soliciting comments and 
information regarding the Petition for Waiver. Specifically, the 
Department is seeking technical information/data on how the reverse 
tumble feature affects test load capacity.

DATES: DOE will accept comments, data, and information not later than 
October 31, 1994.

ADDRESSES: Written comments and statements shall be sent to: Department 
of Energy, Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, Case No. 
CD-001, Mail Stop EE-431, Room 5E-066, Forrestal Building, 1000 
Independence Avenue, SW, Washington, DC, 20585 (202) 586-7140.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

P. Marc LaFrance U.S. Department of Energy, Appliance Standards 
Division, Office of Codes and Standards, Office of Building 
Technologies, Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, Mail 
Stop EE-431, Forrestal Building, 1000 Independence Avenue, SW, 
Washington, DC 20585, (202) 586-8423
Eugene Margolis, Esq, U.S. Department of Energy, Office of General 
Counsel, Mail Stop GC-72, Forrestal Building, 1000 Independence Avenue, 
SW, Washington, DC 20585, (202) 586-9507

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Energy Conservation Program for Consumer 
Program Products (other than automobiles) was established pursuant to 
the Energy Policy and Conservation Act (EPCA), Public Law 94-163, 89 
Stat. 917, as amended by the National Energy Conservation Act (NECPA), 
Public Law 95-619, 92 Stat. 3266, the National Appliance Energy 
Conservation Act of 1987 (NAECA), Public Law 100-12, the National 
Appliance Energy Conservation Amendments of 1988 (NAECA 1988), Public 
Law 100-357, and the Energy Policy Act of 1992, Public Law 102-486, 106 
Stat. 2776, which requires DOE to prescribe standardized test 
procedures to measure the energy efficiency, energy use, or estimated 
annual operating cost of covered consumer products, including clothes 
dryers. The clothes dryer test procedure, among other things, provides 
a means of calculating an energy factor, a measure of energy 
efficiency, which is used to determine if a product is compliant with 
the minimum energy conservation standards. The Department imposed 
amended energy conservation standards requiring minimum energy factors 
for four of the five classes of clothes dryers in a final rule (56 FR 
22279) issued May 14, 1991, and which is effective for products 
manufactured on or after May 14, 1994. These test procedures appear at 
10 CFR Part 430, Subpart D.
    DOE amended the prescribed test procedure by adding 10 CFR 430.27 
on September 26, 1980, creating the waiver process (45 FR 64108). 
Thereafter, DOE further amended the appliance test procedure waiver 
process to allow the Assistant Secretary for Energy Efficiency and 
Renewable Energy (Assistant Secretary) to grant an Interim Waiver from 
test procedure requirements to manufacturers that have petitioned DOE 
for a waiver of such prescribed test procedures (51 FR 42823, November 
26, 1986).
    The waiver process allows the Assistant Secretary to temporarily 
waive the test procedures for a particular basic model when a 
petitioner shows that the basic model contains one or more design 
characteristics which prevent testing according to the prescribed test 
procedures or when the prescribed test procedures may evaluate the 
basic model in a manner so unrepresentative of its true energy 
consumption as to provide materially inaccurate comparative data. 
Waivers generally remain in effect until final test procedure 
amendments become effective, resolving the problem that is the subject 
of the waiver.
    The Interim Waiver provisions, added by the 1986 amendment, allow 
the Assistant Secretary to grant an Interim Waiver when it is 
determined that the applicant will experience economic hardship if the 
Application for Interim Waiver is denied, if it appears likely that the 
Petition for Waiver will be granted, and/or the Assistant Secretary 
determines that it would be desirable for public policy reasons to 
grant immediate relief pending a determination on the Petition for 
Waiver. An Interim Waiver remains in effect for a period of 180 days or 
until DOE issues its determination on the Petition for Waiver, 
whichever is sooner, and may be extended for an additional 180 days, if 
necessary.
    Miele filed a Petition for Waiver and an Application for Interim 
Waiver on April 5, 1994 which was amended on April 20, 1994 and April 
22, 1994, regarding its clothes dryers models T1515A, T1520, T1565CA, 
and T1570C with a reverse tumble feature. Miele states in its April 5, 
1994 submission that ``The specific design characteristics [reverse 
tumble feature] of the Miele clothes dryer make the classification of 
the product as 'compact' totally unrepresentative of the products' true 
energy consumption characteristics and provides materially inaccurate 
comparative data.'' The existing clothes dryer test procedure does not 
have any recognition of the reverse tumble design feature in 
determining dryer size or class.
    Miele has informed the Department (telephone conversation with 
Miele's representative, Mr. John A. Hodges, early April, 1994) that if 
its clothes dryers were tested as a compact (3 pound test load), they 
would not meet the minimum energy conservation standard for the class 
of 120 volt, electric, compact capacity clothes dryers. However, the 
Miele clothes dryers have been tested as standard (7 pound test load) 
and exceeded the minimum energy conservation standard for the class of 
electric, standard capacity clothes dryers.
    On April 27, 1994, the Department received a letter, dated April 
22, 1994, from the Whirlpool Corporation (Whirlpool) opposed to Miele's 
Petition for Waiver and Application for Interim Waiver. On April 29, 
1994, the Department received a letter from the General Electric 
Company (GE) also opposed to Miele's Petition for Waiver and 
Application for Interim Waiver. On May 13, 1994, the Department 
received a letter dated May 5, 1994, from the Speed Queen Company 
(Speed Queen) opposed to Miele's Petition for Waiver. On May 13, 1994, 
Miele provided rebuttal comments.
    On May 20, 1994, Miele provided additional information on the 
impact of reverse tumble action on drying large loads. The Department 
has reviewed all the comments and believes that the majority of these 
comments relate to engineering issues which should be fully debated 
during the Petition for Waiver comment period. The Department is 
interested in the maximum load capability of compact clothes dryers and 
any data regarding energy consumption with larger loads. Additionally, 
the Department is interested in seeking technical information/data on 
how the reverse tumble feature affects load capacity.
    Miele states in its initial submission to the Department that 
``Miele Appliance, Inc. is a small company with under 50 employees and 
will suffer great and irreparable economic hardship if it cannot sell 
its line of clothes dryers as standard.'' Miele further states that 
since its clothes dryer is intended to be sold with its standard size 
front loading clothes washer, ``an inability to sell the clothes dryer 
as standard will cripple sales of washing machines as well.'' Miele 
also states that ``since the revenue from the sale of laundry products 
is essential to the financial well being of the company, the regulatory 
prohibition of sales of the clothes dryers as standard will jeopardize 
the company and result in loss of employment.''
    To grant an Interim Waiver, one of three criteria,  supra, must be 
met. First, in regards to ``economic hardship,'' Miele has indicated 
that failure to sell its clothes dryers as ``standard size'' will 
impact the sale of its laundry products and result in loss in 
employment. However, Miele did not specify any historical nor future 
anticipated revenue loss from these particular models in question. 
Furthermore, Miele did not provide any financial data relative to its 
company nor the financial affiliation of its parent company. The 
Department agrees that the loss of sales of any product will 
financially affect a company, however, the Department does not believe 
that Miele has demonstrated that it would cause economic hardship.
    Second, in regards to ``it appears likely that the Petition for 
Waiver will be granted,'' the Department questions whether the Petition 
for Waiver will be granted. A waiver can be granted for either one of 
two reasons. The first is if a product has design features which the 
test procedure is not capable of testing, and the second is if the test 
procedure provides results which are unrepresentative of its true 
energy consumption as to provide materially inaccurate comparative 
data. Miele certainly can test its products with the Department's test 
procedure. However, in regards to the test procedure providing 
materially inaccurate comparative data, the Department has concern. 
This concern is primarily raised by the appearance that Miele is 
actually submitting the Petition for Waiver to allow its products to 
meet the minimum energy conservation standard versus the test procedure 
providing results which are materially unrepresentative. The Department 
believes that Miele has not demonstrated that the results will provide 
``materially inaccurate comparative data,'' even though Miele contends 
its dryers are more efficient with larger loads. The Department hopes 
to receive additional data in response to today's publication of the 
Miele Petition for Waiver.
    Third, in regards to ``it would be desirable for public policy 
reasons,'' Miele has indicated that denial of the Waiver would be 
destructive to the company and anticompetitive. The Department does not 
believe that either conclusion was demonstrated by Miele. Further, 
Miele indicated that denial of the Waiver blocks innovative, improved 
designs. The company is seeking through the waiver process to meet the 
minimum standard level by having its machine reclassified as a 
``standard'' clothes dryer rather than a ``compact'' clothes dryer. 
With the reverse tumble feature, the Miele clothes dryer does not meet 
the 120v, compact, electric, clothes dryer minimum energy efficiency 
standard. Innovative improved designs are not being blocked. The 
technical merits of the reverse tumble feature must be fully developed 
in the Petition for Waiver procedure.
    Therefore, for the reasons stated above, the Department denies 
Miele's Application for Interim Waiver for its clothes dryers models 
T1515A, T1520, T1565CA, and T1570C. Pursuant to paragraph (e) of 
Sec. 430.27 of Title 10 Code of Federal Regulations Part 430, the 
following letter denying the Application for Interim Waiver to Miele 
was issued.
    Pursuant to paragraph (b) of 10 CFR part 430.27, DOE is hereby 
publishing the ``Petition for Waiver'' in its entirety. The Petition 
contains no confidential information. DOE would appreciate comments, 
data and other information regarding the Petition, discussed above.

    Issued in Washington, DC, September 21, 1994.
Christine A. Ervin,
Assistant Secretary, Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy.

Department of Energy, Washington, DC 20585, September 21, 1994

Mr. Nick Ord,
Vice-President and General Manager,
Miele Appliances Inc.,
22D Worlds Fair Drive,
Somerset, NJ 08873

Dear Mr. Ord:

    This is in response to your Petition for Waiver and Application 
for Interim Waiver of April 5, 1994, amended on April 20, 1994, and 
April 22, 1994, from the Department of Energy (DOE or Department) 
test procedure regarding Miele Appliances Inc. (Miele) clothes dryer 
models T1515A, T1520, T1565CA, and T1570C.
    You have indicated that your clothes dryers have a reverse 
tumble feature which allows them to use a smaller capacity drum for 
a larger clothes dryer load. You further stated, ``The specific 
design characteristics of the Miele clothes dryer make the 
classification of the product as `compact' totally unrepresentative 
of the product's true energy consumption characteristics and 
provides materially inaccurate comparative data.''
    For the reasons stated infra, the Department denies Miele's 
Application for Interim Waiver for its clothes dryers models T1515A, 
T1520, T1565CA, and T1570C.
    In order for the Department to be able to grant Miele an Interim 
Waiver, it must be determined that the applicant will experience 
economic hardship if the Application for Interim Waiver is denied, 
if it appears likely that the Petition for Waiver will be granted, 
and/or the Assistant Secretary determines that it would be desirable 
for public policy reasons to grant immediate relief pending a 
determination on the Petition for Waiver.
    In regards to ``economic hardship,'' Miele has indicated that 
failure to sell its clothes dryers as ``standard size'' will impact 
the sale of its laundry products and result in loss in employment. 
However, Miele did not specify any historical nor future anticipated 
revenue loss from these particular models in question. Furthermore, 
Miele did not provide any financial data relative to its company nor 
the financial affiliation of its parent company. The Department 
agrees that the loss of sales of any product will financially affect 
a company, however the Department does not believe that Miele has 
demonstrated that it would cause economic hardship.
    Second, in regards to ``it appears likely that the Petition for 
Waiver will be granted,'' the Department questions whether the 
Petition for Waiver will be granted. A waiver can be granted for 
either one of two reasons. The first is if a product has design 
features which the test procedure is not capable of testing, and the 
second is if the test procedure provides results which are 
unrepresentative of its true energy consumption as to provide 
materially inaccurate comparative data. Miele certainly can test its 
products with the Department's test procedure. However, in regards 
to the test procedure providing materially inaccurate comparative 
data, the Department has concern. This concern is primarily raised 
by the appearance that Miele is actually submitting the Petition for 
Waiver to allow its products to meet the minimum energy conservation 
standard versus the test procedure providing results which are 
materially unrepresentative. The Department believes that Miele has 
not demonstrated that the results will provide ``materially 
inaccurate comparative data,'' even though Miele contends its dryers 
are more efficient with larger loads. The Department hopes to 
receive additional data in response to the publication of the Miele 
Petition for Waiver.
    Third, in regards to ``it would be desirable for public policy 
reasons,'' Miele has indicated that denial of the Waiver would be 
destructive to the company and anticompetitive. The Department does 
not believe that either conclusion was demonstrated by Miele. 
Further, Miele indicated that denial of the Waiver blocks 
innovative, improved designs. The company is seeking through the 
waiver process to meet the minimum standard level by having its 
machine reclassified as a ``standard'' clothes dryer rather than a 
``compact'' clothes dryer. With the reverse tumble feature, the 
Miele clothes dryer does not meet the 120v, compact, electric, 
clothes dryer minimum energy efficiency standard. Innovative 
improved designs are not being blocked. The technical merits of the 
reverse tumble feature must be fully developed in the Petition for 
Waiver procedure.
    The Department will publish the Petition for Waiver in the 
Federal Register and conduct a formal rulemaking so that the 
technical merits of the submission can be fully developed.
    If there are any questions, please contact Mr. Michael McCabe of 
my staff at (202)-586-9155.
      Sincerely,
Christine A. Ervin,
Assistant Secretary, Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy

April 5, 1994

Assistant Secretary, Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, United 
States Department of Energy, Forrestal Building, 1000 Independence 
Avenue, S.W., Washington, DC 20585

Re: Application for Interim Waiver and Petition for Waiver, 10 
C.F.R., Subpart B, Appendix D--Uniform Test Method for Measuring the 
Energy Consumption of Clothes Dryers

Dear Assistant Secretary:

    Miele Appliances, Inc. hereby submits this Application for 
Interim Waiver and Petition for Waiver pursuant to Title 10 C.F.R. 
Sec. 430.27. This section provides for waiver of test methods on the 
grounds that a basic model contains design characteristics that 
either prevent testing according to the prescribed test procedure or 
produce data so unrepresentative of a covered product's true energy 
consumption characteristics as to provide materially inaccurate 
comparative data.
    Miele Appliances, Inc., a Delaware corporation, is a small 
business with under 50 employees. It currently markets highly 
efficient, advanced-design vented and condenser (non-vented) clothes 
dryers to complement its front-loading, horizontal axis washing 
machines. These products perform as standard size products and 
handle standard capacity loads. They are marketed as standard 
capacity products. Integral to the design of Miele's clothes dryers 
is an advanced drum design that handles a standard load capacity 
with a drum size of 3.54 cu.ft.
    Despite the fact that the Miele clothes dryer has a standard 
load capacity, the DOE test procedure classifies it as ``compact.'' 
According to the DOE test method for measuring the energy 
consumption of clothes dryers, 10 C.F.R. Subpart, B, Appendix D, the 
Miele clothes dryers are classified as ``compact'' (id. Sec. 1.3) 
since their drum size of 3.54 cu.ft. is less than the DOE definition 
of ``standard.'' The definition of ``standard'' is equal to or 
greater than 4.4 cubic feet (id. Sec. 1.9). The definitions of 
``standard'' and ``compact'' were adopted by DOE many years ago\1\ 
and to not take into account the advanced Miele design.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\The DOE test procedure was adopted in 1981, 46 Fed. Reg. 
27326 (May 19, 1981). The definitions of ``standard'' and 
``compact'' in the test procedure were carried over from definitions 
adopted in 1977 by the predecessor agency to DOE, the Federal Energy 
Administration.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The specific design characteristics of the Miele clothes dryers 
make the classification of the products as ``compact'' totally 
unrepresentative of the products' true energy consumption 
characteristics and provide materially inaccurate comparative data. 
This treatment essentially locks Miele out of the market for 
standard clothes dryers in the United States, which would be 
manifestly unfair and discriminatory.
    To remedy this unfairness and discrimination, Miele Appliances, 
Inc. urgently requests an Interim Waiver and a Waiver to permit its 
clothes dryers to be treated as ``standard size'' for purposes of 
the test procedure and to determine compliance with the related 
federal efficiency standard.
    Miele clothes dryers are clearly designed to operate as 
``standard size'' dryers. They are designed to pair with Miele's 
standard clothes washer. They handle a standard load. When tested as 
``standard size,'' the clothes dryer easily exceeds the minimum DOE 
energy requirements for ``standard size'' clothes dryers (10 C.F.R. 
Sec. 430.32(h)). More specifically:
     The Miele clothes dryers are designed to complement 
Miele's front-loading washing machines, Models W1918 and W1930. (See 
product literature, attached hereto as Appendix 1.) These washing 
machines are classified by DOE as being of ``standard'' capacity, 
since their drum capacity exceeds the 1.6 cubic feet minimum 
capacity required for classification as ``standard''. (See 
independent ETL testing verification, Appendix 2.)
     When the Miele clothes dryers are tested as 
``standard'' appliances according to the prescribed DOE 
requirements, all models easily comply with the energy consumption 
requirements. (See independent ETL testing verification, Appendix 
3.)
     Miele clothes dryers are able to achieve these 
``standard'' energy efficient rating despite their drum size, 
because of specific design characteristics, namely:

--Miele clothes dryers have reverse tumble action. Unlike 
conventional drum dryers, Miele dryers rotate clockwise (60 
seconds), stop and then rotate counterclockwise (60 seconds). This 
procedure is continued through all aspects of the drying cycle. The 
purpose of this reverse tumble action is to be able to dry a 
standard load of fabrics evenly, since by rotating in both 
directions the fabrics cannot roll up a ball. This avoids having the 
fabrics being dry on the outside and wet/damp on the inside, as 
would otherwise happen in a product with this drum size.
--Miele clothes dryers have a lower amperage than do larger drum 
dryers. Miele clothes dryers are rated at 15 amps in contrast to 30 
amps to larger drum dryers. Miele clothes dryers also have lower 
heat output, i.e., the clothes are dried at lower temperatures than 
conventional 30 amp dryers.

    Miele's line of condenser dryers have additional special design 
characteristics. Miele condenser dryers do not vent the exhaust air 
to the outside, but rather convert the hot, humid air to water 
inside the appliance. This technology benefits those dwellers of 
high-rise apartments, who in many cases have no way to vent to the 
outside, or at least not without considerable remodelling/
construction expense. This advantageous design characteristic 
produces a more complex drying process than the regular vented 
dryer, yet when tested as a ``standard'' appliance, complies with 
the DOE energy efficiency standard.
    The Miele clothes washer and clothes dryer are marketed and 
intended to be used as a standard laundry pair. If the clothes dryer 
were forced to be classified as ``compact,'' it would jeopardize the 
market for both the clothes washer and clothes dryer. Compact 
clothes dryers are perceived in the marketplace as being very 
different from a standard clothes dryer. Compact clothes dryers are 
perceived as having fewer features and therefore less desirable than 
standard clothes dryers.
    In light of the foregoing, Miele requests an Interim Waiver and 
Waiver that will make the following amendments to 10 C.F.R., Subpart 
B. Appendix D, with respect to Miele clothes dryers Models T1515A, 
T1520, T1565CA, and T1570C [additions underlined]:

  1.3  ``Compact'' or ``compact size'' means a clothes dryer with a 
drum capacity of less than 4.4 cubic feet, except that a clothes 
dryer with a drum capacity meeting the requirements of Section 1.9 
shall be deemed to be a ``standard size'' clothes dryer and shall be 
tested pursuant to the testing conditions and test procedures for 
``standard size'' clothes dryers.
* * * * *
  1.9  ``Standard size'' means a clothes dryer with a drum capacity 
of 4.4 cubic feet or greater, except that a clothes dryer with a 
drum capacity of 3.50 cubic feet or greater with reverse tumble 
action that alternately rotates the drum clockwise and 
counterclockwise during the drying cycle to dry a standard size 
drying load shall be deemed to be ``standard size'' clothes dryer 
and shall be tested pursuant to the testing conditions and test 
procedures for ``standard size'' clothes dryers.

    Miele Appliances, Inc. requests immediate relief by grant of the 
proposed Interim Waiver. Grant of an Interim Waiver is fully 
justified:
    Economic Hardship--Miele Appliances, Inc. is a small company 
with under 50 employees and will suffer great and irreparable 
economic hardship if it cannot sell its line of clothes dryers as 
standard. If Miele clothes dryers are not treated as standard, they 
will in effect be denied effective access to the United States 
market. Beyond that, since the Miele clothes dryer is intended to be 
sold as a pair with one of the Miele energy and water efficient 
standard size front-loading washing machines discussed above (and 
depicted in Appendix 1), an inability to sell the clothes dryer as 
standard will cripple sales of the washing machine as well. Since 
the revenue from the sale of laundry products is essential to the 
financial well-being of the company, the regulatory prohibition of 
sales of the clothes dryer as standard will jeopardize the company 
and result in loss of employment.
    Significant investment has already been made in developing Miele 
clothes dryers that comply with recognized United States safety 
testing standards. An inability to sell the products as standard 
size due to regulatory action would not allow Miele to recoup these 
significant investments, the financial consequences of which would 
further jeopardize the company.
    To comply with the DOE definition of a ``standard'' clothes 
dryer, i.e., a drum size equal to or greater than 4.4 cubic feet, 
Miele would have to initiate great manufacturing and tooling changes 
in order to produce such a product. The huge investments needed to 
accomplish this would result in a significant increase in the 
manufacturing cost of the clothes dryers, which would not benefit 
consumers and would simply result in substantially higher cost to 
the consumer. This would render Miele products totally 
uncompetitive. Consequently, the financial well-being of the company 
would rapidly deteriorate.
    Likely Approval of Waiver--The Petition for Waiver is likely to 
be granted, because the design characteristics of the clothes dryers 
are intended to allow the products to function as energy-efficient 
``standard'' clothes dryers. In addition, it is manifestly unfair to 
classify the Miele clothes dryer as being ``compact'' even though it 
performs as a ``standard'' clothes dryer and is designed to 
complement the matching Miele clothes washer, which is classified by 
DOE as being of ``standard'' capacity. An independent testing 
company has verified that when tested according to DOE testing 
procedures as a ``standard'' clothes dryer, Miele dryers easily 
comply with the consumption requirements.
    Only a relatively small number of clothes dryers will be sold by 
Miele Appliances, Inc. in the time period between Interim Waiver and 
Waiver. During this time, whether the clothes dryers are classified 
as ``compact'' or ``standard,'' this would have a negligible impact 
on energy consumed or consumer decisions. Any such impact would be 
beneficial.
    Public Policy Merits--Miele clothes dryers, when classified as 
``standard'' capacity appliances, comply with DOE energy consumption 
requirements. Therefore, consumers should not be denied access to 
these energy-efficient appliances, and this is an additional reason 
why the requested Interim Waiver should receive prompt approval. The 
basic purpose of the Energy Policy and Conservation Act, as amended 
by the National Appliance Energy Conservation Act, is to foster 
purchase of energy-efficient appliances, not hinder such purchases. 
The granting of the Waiver and Interim Waiver will promote this 
policy and will result in increased energy savings.
    Miele clothes dryers have been shown to be highly energy 
efficient. These space-saving products provide an energy efficient 
solution to families living in city dwellings where space for 
laundry products is limited. The dryer can energy-efficiently dry a 
``standard'' load size, yet take up a small amount of floor space. 
The condenser dryer also makes a dryer available to households where 
for physical, structural reasons a vented dryer could otherwise not 
be installed. Miele clothes dryers thus offer benefits in the public 
interest. To encourage and foster the availability of these energy-
efficient products is in the public interest.
    Standards should not be used as a means to block innovative, 
improved designs.\2\ Miele's design is an innovative and improved 
way to dry a standard load of laundry and provides substantial 
benefits to the public. DOE's rules should accommodate and 
encourage--not act to block--such a product.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\See FTC Advisory Opinion No. 457, TRR 1718.20 (1971 Transfer 
Binder); 49 Fed. Reg. 32213 (Aug. 13, 1984); 52 Fed. Reg. 49141, 
49147-48 (Dec. 30, 1987).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Granting the Interim Waiver and Waiver will also eliminate a 
non-tariff trade barrier.
    Furthermore, the success of small business has wide-reaching 
public policy benefits. In the case of Miele Appliances, Inc., 
continued employment creation and ongoing investments in its 
marketing, sales and servicing activities will be fostered by 
approval of the requested Interim Waiver. Conversely, denial of the 
requested Waiver and Interim Waiver would be destructive to the 
company and would be anticompetitive.
    Thank you for your timely attention to this request for Interim 
Waiver and Waiver. We hereby certify that all clothes dryer 
manufacturers of domestically marked units known to Miele 
Appliances. Inc. have been notified by letter of this application, 
copies of which are attached (Appendix 4).
      Sincerely,
Nick Ord,
Vice-President and General Manager Miele Appliances, Inc.
Enclosures (Appendices 1-4)

[FR Doc. 94-24127 Filed 9-28-94; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6450-01-P