`
`IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
`
`
`NATURAL RESOURCES DEFENSE
`COUNCIL; CENTER FOR
`BIOLOGICAL DIVERSITY;
`CONSUMER FEDERATION OF
`AMERICA; MASSACHUSETTS UNION
`OF PUBLIC HOUSING TENANTS;
`PUBLIC CITIZEN; and SIERRA CLUB,
`
`
`
`
`
`DAN BROUILLETTE, in his official
`capacity as the Secretary of the United
`States Department of Energy; and the
`UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF
`ENERGY,
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Defendants.
`
`Plaintiffs,
`
`
`
`v.
`
`
`
`
`
`Case No. 20-cv-9127
`ECF Case
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
` )
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`
`COMPLAINT FOR DECLARATORY AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF
`
`1.
`
`During the energy crisis of the 1970s, Congress recognized the risks of
`
`uncontrolled, inefficient energy use. In response, it tasked the U.S. Department of Energy
`
`with ensuring continued energy-efficiency improvements for consumer and commercial
`
`products—improvements that save consumers and businesses money while also reducing
`
`unnecessary electricity generation. This task remains as vital now as ever. But for the past
`
`four years, DOE has utterly abdicated its responsibility.
`
`2.
`
`In the Energy Policy and Conservation Act (EPCA), Congress established a
`
`program to ensure that common consumer and commercial products that use large amounts
`
`of energy meet minimum energy conservation standards. EPCA directs DOE to meet
`
`specific timetables to periodically review and revise these standards to ensure that they are
`
`
`
`Case 1:20-cv-09127-AJN Document 1 Filed 10/30/20 Page 2 of 32
`
`set at the maximum level of energy efficiency that is technologically feasible and
`
`economically justified.
`
`3.
`
`Over the past four years, DOE has missed EPCA deadlines for more than two
`
`dozen consumer and commercial products. These overdue products include energy-
`
`intensive home appliances such as furnaces, air conditioners, water heaters, dishwashers,
`
`and clothes dryers, as well as commercial equipment used by countless businesses, such as
`
`motors, walk-in coolers, and transformers. Additional significant, technologically feasible,
`
`and economically justified energy savings are available for these overdue products.
`
`4.
`
`DOE’s failure to comply with Congress’s explicit deadlines for reviewing and
`
`revising energy conservation standards for the overdue products violates EPCA. DOE’s
`
`foot-dragging results in greater—and avoidable—energy use, causing increased air pollution
`
`that harms public health and the environment, and higher energy bills for consumers and
`
`other users of the overdue products.
`
`5.
`
`Plaintiffs bring this suit to end DOE’s unlawful abdication of its duties and
`
`ask this Court to set an expeditious, enforceable schedule compelling DOE to comply with
`
`EPCA’s requirements for the review and revision of energy conservation standards for the
`
`overdue products.
`
`PARTIES
`
`Plaintiffs
`
`6.
`
`Plaintiff Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC) is a national, nonprofit
`
`environmental and public health organization with several hundred thousand members
`
`nationwide. NRDC engages in research, advocacy, media, and litigation related to
`
`protecting public health and the environment. One of NRDC’s top priorities is to fight
`
`
`
`2
`
`
`
`Case 1:20-cv-09127-AJN Document 1 Filed 10/30/20 Page 3 of 32
`
`climate change by cutting carbon emissions and building the clean energy economy. As part
`
`of this work, NRDC promotes the use of sustainable energy sources and energy efficiency to
`
`reduce greenhouse gas pollution, lower consumer energy bills, and minimize the adverse
`
`environmental impacts of electricity generation and fossil fuel production. NRDC has
`
`participated in the majority of DOE’s rulemakings developing energy conservation
`
`standards for consumer products and commercial equipment.
`
`7.
`
`Plaintiff Center for Biological Diversity is a national nonprofit organization
`
`with more than one million members and online activists who care about protecting the
`
`natural environment, including wildlife, from climate change and other environmental
`
`degradation. The Center uses scientific expertise and legal action to defend endangered
`
`species and educates the public on threats to wildlife and biodiversity. Among the Center’s
`
`priorities are initiatives that advance the critical energy transition to clean and renewable
`
`energy.
`
`8.
`
`Plaintiff Consumer Federation of America (CFA) is an association of more
`
`than 250 nonprofit consumer organizations established to advance the consumer interest
`
`through research, advocacy, and education. For more than twenty years, CFA has
`
`supported and advocated for cost-effective energy-efficiency policies, practices, and
`
`standards as they benefit consumers through lower energy bills and defer the need for
`
`additional energy supplies, which also helps to keep customers’ utility rates down. CFA has
`
`participated in countless rulemakings, requests for information, and other proceedings
`
`involving DOE’s energy conservation standards program for consumer products.
`
`9.
`
`Plaintiff Massachusetts Union of Public Housing Tenants (MUPHT) is a
`
`membership organization that represents the interests of the tens of thousands of families
`
`
`
`3
`
`
`
`Case 1:20-cv-09127-AJN Document 1 Filed 10/30/20 Page 4 of 32
`
`that reside in public housing in Massachusetts. The overwhelming majority of MUPHT’s
`
`members live on annual incomes well below the median income in Massachusetts. For well
`
`over a decade, MUPHT has strongly supported strengthening energy conservation standards
`
`promulgated by DOE.
`
`10.
`
`Plaintiff Public Citizen is a nonprofit consumer advocacy organization with
`
`members in all fifty states. It routinely appears before Congress, administrative agencies,
`
`and the courts to support the creation and enforcement of laws and regulations to protect
`
`consumers, workers, and the general public. Among other issues, Public Citizen fights for
`
`strong health, safety, and environmental protections.
`
`11.
`
`Plaintiff Sierra Club is a national, nonprofit environmental organization with
`
`hundreds of thousands of members nationwide. Sierra Club’s purposes include enhancing
`
`public health and the environment and practicing and promoting the responsible use of the
`
`Earth’s ecosystems and resources. Energy efficiency is crucial to achieving Sierra Club’s
`
`mission, and Sierra Club has a variety of initiatives designed to encourage businesses,
`
`individuals, and utilities to undertake energy conservation measures to reduce greenhouse
`
`gas pollution, lower consumer energy bills, and minimize the adverse environmental
`
`impacts of electricity generation and oil and natural gas production.
`
`12.
`
`Plaintiffs bring this suit on their own behalf. Plaintiffs are organizations that
`
`use or own products with overdue standards and intend to replace those products in the near
`
`future. DOE’s failure to meet EPCA’s deadlines for the overdue products harms plaintiffs by
`
`restricting their opportunities to purchase the most energy-efficient versions of those
`
`products.
`
`
`
`4
`
`
`
`Case 1:20-cv-09127-AJN Document 1 Filed 10/30/20 Page 5 of 32
`
`13.
`
`Plaintiffs also bring this suit on behalf of their members. Plaintiffs’ members
`
`include consumers and business owners who use, or whose businesses use, products with
`
`overdue standards and intend to replace those products in the near future. DOE’s failure to
`
`meet EPCA’s deadlines for the overdue products harms these members by restricting their
`
`opportunities to purchase the most energy-efficient versions of those products.
`
`14.
`
`Plaintiffs also have members who use, and pay for the energy consumed by,
`
`overdue products that are owned and maintained by a third party, like a landlord. These
`
`members are harmed by higher energy bills resulting from DOE’s failure to meet EPCA’s
`
`deadlines for the overdue products.
`
`15.
`
`Plaintiff CFA’s members include member organizations that represent
`
`individual consumers who use products with overdue standards and intend to replace those
`
`products in the near future. DOE’s failure to meet EPCA’s deadlines for the overdue
`
`products harms these consumers through higher energy bills and by restricting their
`
`opportunities to purchase the most energy-efficient versions of those products.
`
`16.
`
`Plaintiffs also have members who live near power plants that burn fossil fuels
`
`and emit pollutants that harm public health and the environment. DOE’s failure to meet
`
`EPCA’s deadlines for the overdue products means consumers and businesses are using less
`
`efficient products that increase the demand for electricity generation and, consequently,
`
`emissions from fossil-fuel power plants. DOE’s failure to meet EPCA’s deadlines for the
`
`overdue products thus harms plaintiffs’ members by increasing their exposure to pollutants
`
`emitted from nearby fossil-fuel power plants.
`
`17.
`
`Plaintiffs also have members who live or own businesses in areas at risk of
`
`harm from severe weather events and other climate-related impacts, such as flooding, storm
`
`
`
`5
`
`
`
`Case 1:20-cv-09127-AJN Document 1 Filed 10/30/20 Page 6 of 32
`
`surge, and sea-level rise. DOE’s failure to meet EPCA’s deadlines for the overdue products
`
`contributes to climate change by increasing the demand for fossil-fuel generated electricity
`
`and thus the emission of greenhouse gases from fossil-fuel power plants. DOE’s failure to
`
`meet EPCA’s deadlines for the overdue products thus harms plaintiffs’ members by
`
`increasing the risk of physical and economic harm from severe weather events and other
`
`impacts related to climate change.
`
`18. DOE’s failure to meet EPCA’s deadlines for the overdue products harms the
`
`consumer, environmental, economic, and health interests of plaintiffs and their members
`
`because it denies them the benefits of updated energy conservation standards for those
`
`products. Plaintiffs’ and their members’ injuries would be redressed by the requested relief
`
`requiring DOE to comply with its obligations to review and revise the standards for the
`
`overdue products.
`
`Defendants
`
`19. Defendant Dan Brouillette, Secretary of Energy, is the head of the
`
`Department of Energy and is responsible for administering EPCA, including the energy
`
`conservation standard provisions at issue in this case. Plaintiffs sue Secretary Brouillette in
`
`his official capacity.
`
`20. Defendant U.S. Department of Energy is an agency of the United States. The
`
`Department of Energy is responsible for implementation of EPCA, including the energy
`
`conservation standard provisions at issue in this case. Defendants are referred to collectively
`
`in this Complaint as DOE.
`
`
`
`6
`
`
`
`Case 1:20-cv-09127-AJN Document 1 Filed 10/30/20 Page 7 of 32
`
`JURISDICTION AND VENUE
`
`21.
`
`This Court has jurisdiction under 42 U.S.C. §§ 6305(a), 6316(a), 6316(b)(1),
`
`and 28 U.S.C. §§ 1331, 1361.
`
`22.
`
`This Court has authority to issue declaratory relief under 28 U.S.C.
`
`§§ 2201(a), 2202.
`
`23.
`
`24.
`
`This Court has authority to issue injunctive relief under 42 U.S.C. § 6305(a).
`
`Venue is proper because plaintiffs bring this civil action against an agency of
`
`the United States and an officer and employee of the United States acting in his official
`
`capacity, plaintiff NRDC resides in this district, and no real property is involved in the
`
`action. See 28 U.S.C. § 1391(e)(1)(C).
`
`25.
`
`To the extent sixty-days’ written notice was required for any of the claims for
`
`relief in this Complaint, plaintiffs provided notice of all such claims in the form and manner
`
`required by EPCA. 42 U.S.C. § 6305(b)(2). A copy of plaintiffs’ notice letter is attached as
`
`Exhibit A.
`
`FACTUAL, STATUTORY, AND REGULATORY BACKGROUND
`
`Energy conservation standards protect consumers, public health, and the environment
`
`26.
`
`Burning fossil fuels for energy causes a wide range of adverse environmental
`
`impacts, including emissions of air pollutants that threaten public health, harm plants and
`
`wildlife, and contribute to climate change. In the United States, power plants burn fossil
`
`fuels like coal and natural gas to generate electricity to power homes and businesses, while
`
`fossil fuels like fuel oil and natural gas are combusted directly in homes and businesses to
`
`power appliances.
`
`
`
`7
`
`
`
`Case 1:20-cv-09127-AJN Document 1 Filed 10/30/20 Page 8 of 32
`
`27.
`
`Each year, huge amounts of electricity, fuel oil, and natural gas are wasted
`
`through inefficient usage by outdated consumer and commercial products. This waste
`
`harms consumers, ratepayers, public health, and the environment.
`
`28.
`
`The development of cost-effective, technologically feasible energy-efficiency
`
`standards for consumer and commercial products reduces electricity, fuel oil, and natural
`
`gas demand and waste. By decreasing demand, up-to-date energy conservation standards
`
`reduce emissions of dangerous air pollutants and greenhouse gases associated with
`
`electricity generation and fossil fuel consumption in buildings.
`
`29.
`
`Energy conservation standards also have important consumer benefits.
`
`Because energy-efficient products use less electricity, natural gas, and other fossil fuels,
`
`customers’ energy bills are substantially reduced over the lifetime of the energy-efficient
`
`products they own or use.
`
`30.
`
`Energy conservation standards also benefit consumers, particularly low-
`
`income consumers, by helping to address the “split incentive” problem experienced when
`
`the person who buys a product is not the person who will pay to operate it.
`
`31.
`
`Split incentives are an important aspect of the housing rental market, where
`
`landlords have an economic incentive to buy the cheapest appliances, without regard to
`
`energy conservation, but the tenants pay the energy bills to operate those appliances. They
`
`are also an important aspect of the new home market, where home developers often have an
`
`incentive to buy the cheapest appliances, without regard to energy efficiency, while the
`
`home buyer will pay the higher energy bills that result. Strong energy-efficiency standards
`
`help ensure that tenants and home buyers are not stuck with unnecessarily high bills from
`
`operating inefficient appliances that someone else purchased.
`
`
`
`8
`
`
`
`Case 1:20-cv-09127-AJN Document 1 Filed 10/30/20 Page 9 of 32
`
`32. Up-to-date energy conservation standards are particularly important for
`
`moderate- and low-income consumers. These consumers spend disproportionately more on
`
`energy bills than other income groups, and therefore benefit more from lower energy bills
`
`that result from more efficient appliances.
`
`33.
`
`Energy conservation standards also help consumers by making energy-
`
`efficient products the norm, rather than the exception. Up-to-date standards ensure that
`
`consumers can find and purchase efficient products easily and will not have to pay a
`
`premium for them. Up-to-date standards also give consumers peace of mind to know any
`
`product they buy will meet minimum efficiency standards that are both cost-effective and
`
`reflective of current technological capability.
`
`EPCA requires DOE to regularly review and revise energy conservation standards
`
`34. Congress enacted EPCA in 1975 to reduce wasteful use of the nation’s energy
`
`resources following the 1973 oil embargo. See Pub. L. No. 94-163, 89 Stat. 871 (1975)
`
`(codified at 42 U.S.C. §§ 6291-6309). EPCA’s purposes include “conserv[ing] energy
`
`supplies through energy conservation programs” and improving the energy efficiency of
`
`major appliances. 42 U.S.C. § 6201(4), (5).
`
`35. Under EPCA, DOE issues energy conservation standards for both consumer
`
`products, like furnaces, air conditioners, water heaters, dishwashers, and clothes dryers, as
`
`well as commercial equipment, such as motors, walk-in coolers, and transformers. EPCA’s
`
`energy conservation program for consumer products is set forth at 42 U.S.C. §§ 6291-6309,
`
`while its program for commercial equipment is set forth at 42 U.S.C. §§ 6311-6317.
`
`36. When DOE establishes or amends an energy conservation standard under
`
`EPCA, whether for a consumer or commercial product, the standard must be designed to
`
`
`
`9
`
`
`
`Case 1:20-cv-09127-AJN Document 1 Filed 10/30/20 Page 10 of 32
`
`achieve the maximum improvement in energy efficiency that is technologically feasible and
`
`economically justified. 42 U.S.C. §§ 6295(o)(2)(A), 6316(a). The standard must also result in
`
`significant conservation of energy. Id. §§ 6295(o)(3)(B), 6316(a).
`
`37.
`
`EPCA’s energy conservation standards have been highly effective in
`
`improving our nation’s energy efficiency, saving consumers money, and avoiding emissions
`
`of greenhouse gases and other air pollutants. DOE has estimated that, by 2030, the
`
`standards completed through 2016 will have saved more energy than the entire nation
`
`consumes in one year and will have cumulatively saved consumers more than $2 trillion on
`
`their utility bills. Reduced energy use also avoids emissions of harmful air pollutants:
`
`through 2030, standards completed through 2016 will cut emissions of more than 7.9 billion
`
`metric tons of carbon dioxide, more greenhouse gas emissions than the entire United States
`
`generates in a year.
`
`38.
`
`The continued success of DOE’s energy conservation program, however,
`
`depends on DOE’s regular review and update of standards to keep pace with technological
`
`advances that can lead to further significant increases in energy efficiency and cost savings.
`
`39.
`
`EPCA accordingly imposes strict deadlines requiring DOE to regularly review
`
`and amend its energy conservation standards. 42 U.S.C. §§ 6295(m)(1), (3), 6313(a)(6)(C)(i),
`
`(iii). Further, EPCA imposes an “anti-backsliding” prohibition, which prevents DOE from
`
`prescribing any amended standard that decreases the minimum required energy efficiency
`
`for a product. Id. §§ 6295(o)(1), 6313(a)(6)(B)(iii)(I).
`
`40.
`
`EPCA empowers private parties to sue to enforce its deadlines for energy
`
`conservation standards. Under EPCA, “any person may commence a civil action” against
`
`any federal agency “where there is an alleged failure of such agency to perform any act or
`
`
`
`10
`
`
`
`Case 1:20-cv-09127-AJN Document 1 Filed 10/30/20 Page 11 of 32
`
`duty under [EPCA] which is not discretionary,” id. § 6305(a)(2), or against the Secretary of
`
`Energy where “there is an alleged failure of the Secretary to comply with a nondiscretionary
`
`duty to issue a proposed or final rule according to the schedules set forth in [EPCA] section
`
`6295,” id. § 6305(a)(3). EPCA requires that courts expedite disposition of actions brought
`
`under section 6305(a)(3), and, for claims brought to enforce deadlines under section 6295,
`
`authorizes courts to order relief that will ensure the Secretary’s compliance with not only
`
`missed deadlines but also future deadlines for those same overdue products. Id. § 6305(a).
`
`41.
`
`EPCA’s private enforcement provisions, id., also apply to DOE’s statutory
`
`duties to review and revise energy conservation standards for the commercial equipment at
`
`issue in this case. Id. § 6316(a), (b)(1). For commercial equipment, any reference in the
`
`private enforcement provisions to deadlines under section 6295 is deemed a reference to
`
`deadlines under section 6313. Id. § 6316(a)(1), (b)(1).
`
`DOE’s prolonged failure to comply with EPCA’s energy conservation standard deadlines
`
`42. Despite Congress’s explicit directives requiring DOE to regularly review and
`
`revise its energy conservation standards, DOE has failed to meet statutory deadlines with
`
`respect to more than two dozen consumer and commercial products over the past four
`
`years.
`
`43. Updated energy conservation standards for the overdue products would, by
`
`2035, save U.S. consumers and businesses more than $22 billion per year, while preventing
`
`more than 75 million metric tons of carbon pollution annually.
`
`A.
`
`44.
`
`Consumer products
`
`For consumer products, EPCA requires DOE to review the energy
`
`conservation standards for each covered product every six years and either make a
`
`
`
`11
`
`
`
`Case 1:20-cv-09127-AJN Document 1 Filed 10/30/20 Page 12 of 32
`
`determination that no amendments are needed or else propose amended standards. 42
`
`U.S.C. § 6295(m)(1). DOE may refuse to amend standards for a covered product only if
`
`amended standards will not result in significant conservation of energy, are not
`
`technologically feasible, or are not cost effective. Id. § 6295(m)(1)(A), (n)(2), (o)(2)(B)(i)(II).
`
`If DOE cannot reach one of those conclusions, it must propose amended standards
`
`“designed to achieve the maximum improvement in energy efficiency” that is
`
`“technologically feasible and economically justified.” Id. § 6295(m)(1)(B), (o)(2)(A).
`
`45. Once DOE proposes to amend the energy conservation standards for a
`
`covered product, it must publish final amended standards within two years. Id.
`
`§§ 6295(m)(3)(A). Conversely, if DOE issues a determination not to amend, it must review
`
`the standard for that product again within three years. Id. § 6295(m)(3)(B).
`
`46.
`
`For certain consumer products, EPCA also imposes specific date-certain
`
`deadlines for DOE to issue final rules related to updating the current standards. E.g., id.
`
`§ 6295(hh)(3) (metal halide lamp fixtures).
`
`47.
`
`Since 2016, DOE has missed its EPCA deadlines to review energy
`
`conservation standards for ten consumer products under 42 U.S.C. § 6295(m)(1): pool
`
`heaters; water heaters; clothes dryers; room air conditioners; oil furnaces and weatherized
`
`gas furnaces; refrigerators and freezers; fluorescent lamp ballasts; clothes washers;
`
`microwave ovens; and furnace fans.
`
`48.
`
`Since 2016, DOE has missed its EPCA deadlines to review energy
`
`conservation standards for two consumer products under 42 U.S.C. § 6295(m)(3): direct
`
`heating equipment and dishwashers.
`
`
`
`12
`
`
`
`Case 1:20-cv-09127-AJN Document 1 Filed 10/30/20 Page 13 of 32
`
`49.
`
`Since 2016, DOE has missed its EPCA deadlines to issue final rules for
`
`energy conservation standards for three consumer products: non-weatherized and mobile
`
`home gas furnaces; conventional cooking products; and metal halide lamp fixtures.
`
`B.
`
`50.
`
`Commercial equipment
`
`EPCA imposes a similar review requirement for commercial equipment.
`
`DOE must review the energy conservation standards for each class of covered equipment
`
`every six years and either make a determination that no amendments are needed or else
`
`propose amended standards. 42 U.S.C. § 6313(a)(6)(C)(i). DOE may refuse to amend
`
`standards for a product only if amended standards will not result in significant additional
`
`conservation of energy, are not technologically feasible, or are not economically justified.
`
`See id. §§ 6313(a)(6)(A)(ii)(II), (C)(i)(I). If DOE cannot reach one of those conclusions, it
`
`must propose amended standards. Id. § 6313(a)(6)(C)(i)(II).
`
`51. Once DOE proposes to amend the energy conservation standards for a
`
`product, it must publish final amended standards within two years. Id. § 6313(a)(6)(C)(iii)(I).
`
`Conversely, if DOE issues a determination not to amend, it must review the standards for
`
`that product again within three years. Id. § 6313(a)(6)(C)(iii)(II).
`
`52.
`
`For certain commercial equipment categories, EPCA also imposes specific
`
`date-certain deadlines for DOE to issue final rules related to updating the current standards.
`
`E.g., id. § 6313(f)(5) (walk-in coolers and freezers).
`
`53.
`
`EPCA also requires that when the American Society of Heating,
`
`Refrigerating, and Air-conditioning Engineers (ASHRAE) updates its Standard 90.1 for
`
`certain commercial products, DOE must establish a uniform national standard for any such
`
`product either at a level equivalent to the ASHRAE standard within 18 months, see id.
`
`
`
`13
`
`
`
`Case 1:20-cv-09127-AJN Document 1 Filed 10/30/20 Page 14 of 32
`
`§ 6313(a)(6)(A)(ii)(I), or at a level that is more stringent than the ASHRAE standard within
`
`30 months, id. § 6313(a)(6)(B)(i).
`
`54.
`
`Since 2016, DOE has missed its EPCA deadlines to review energy
`
`conservation standards for four commercial products under 42 U.S.C. § 6313(a)(6)(C)(i):
`
`small electric motors; water-cooled and evaporatively-cooled commercial air conditioners
`
`and heat pumps; distribution transformers; and electric motors.
`
`55.
`
`Since 2016, DOE has missed its EPCA deadlines to issue final rules for
`
`energy conservation standards for three commercial products: commercial water heaters;
`
`walk-in coolers and freezers; and commercial refrigeration equipment.
`
`56.
`
`Since 2016, DOE has missed its EPCA deadlines to keep up with, or surpass,
`
`the ASHRAE Standard 90.1 as required by EPCA for three products: dedicated outdoor air
`
`systems; computer room air conditioners; and variable refrigerant flow air conditioners and
`
`heat pumps.
`
`CLAIMS FOR RELIEF
`
`FIRST CLAIM FOR RELIEF
`
`(Small Electric Motors)
`
`57.
`
`58.
`
`Plaintiffs incorporate by reference paragraphs 1 through 56.
`
`Small electric motors are general purpose motors that are not used as
`
`components of products already covered under EPCA.
`
`59. DOE set energy conservation standards for small electric motors on March 9,
`
`2010. 75 Fed. Reg. 10,874 (Mar. 9, 2010).
`
`
`
`14
`
`
`
`Case 1:20-cv-09127-AJN Document 1 Filed 10/30/20 Page 15 of 32
`
`60. Under 42 U.S.C. § 6313(a)(6)(C)(i), DOE was required, no later than March
`
`9, 2016, to review the standards for small electric motors and either propose amended
`
`standards or make a determination that amendments were not necessary.
`
`61. DOE missed that deadline, which is now more than four years overdue.
`
`62. DOE’s missed deadline constitutes a failure to perform a nondiscretionary act
`
`or duty in violation of EPCA. 42 U.S.C. § 6305(a)(2).
`
`SECOND CLAIM FOR RELIEF
`
`(Pool Heaters)
`
`63.
`
`64.
`
`Plaintiffs incorporate by reference paragraphs 1 through 56.
`
`Pool heaters are consumer products designed to heat water in swimming
`
`pools, spas, and hot tubs.
`
`65. DOE last amended the energy conservation standards for pool heaters on
`
`April 16, 2010. 75 Fed. Reg. 20,112 (Apr. 16, 2010).
`
`66. Under 42 U.S.C. § 6295(m)(1), DOE was required, no later than April 16,
`
`2016, to review the pool heater standards and publish a final rule that either amended the
`
`standards or determined that amendments were not necessary.
`
`67. DOE missed that deadline, which is now more than four years overdue.
`
`68. DOE’s missed deadline constitutes a failure to perform a nondiscretionary act
`
`or duty in violation of EPCA. 42 U.S.C. § 6305(a)(2).
`
`THIRD CLAIM FOR RELIEF
`
`(Residential Water Heaters)
`
`69.
`
`Plaintiffs incorporate by reference paragraphs 1 through 56.
`
`
`
`15
`
`
`
`Case 1:20-cv-09127-AJN Document 1 Filed 10/30/20 Page 16 of 32
`
`70. Residential water heaters are products that use oil, gas, or electricity to heat
`
`potable water for use outside of the product itself.
`
`71. DOE last amended the energy conservation standards for residential water
`
`heaters on April 16, 2010. 75 Fed. Reg. 20,112 (Apr. 16, 2010).
`
`72. Under 42 U.S.C. § 6295(m)(1), DOE was required, no later than April 16,
`
`2016, to review the water heater standards and either propose amended standards or make a
`
`determination that amendments were not necessary.
`
`73. DOE missed that deadline, which is now more than four years overdue.
`
`74. DOE’s missed deadline constitutes a failure to perform a nondiscretionary act
`
`or duty in violation of EPCA. 42 U.S.C. § 6305(a)(2).
`
`FOURTH CLAIM FOR RELIEF
`
`(Residential Clothes Dryers)
`
`75.
`
`Plaintiffs incorporate by reference paragraphs 1 through 56.
`
`76. DOE last amended the energy conservation standards for residential clothes
`
`dryers on April 21, 2011. 76 Fed. Reg. 22,454 (Apr. 21, 2011).
`
`77. Under 42 U.S.C. § 6295(m)(1), DOE was required, no later than April 21,
`
`2017, to review the clothes dryer standards and either propose amended standards or make
`
`a determination that amendments were not necessary.
`
`78. DOE missed that deadline, which is now more than three years overdue.
`
`79. DOE’s missed deadline constitutes a failure to perform a nondiscretionary act
`
`or duty in violation of EPCA. 42 U.S.C. § 6305(a)(2).
`
`
`
`16
`
`
`
`Case 1:20-cv-09127-AJN Document 1 Filed 10/30/20 Page 17 of 32
`
`FIFTH CLAIM FOR RELIEF
`
`(Room Air Conditioners)
`
`80.
`
`Plaintiffs incorporate by reference paragraphs 1 through 56.
`
`81. Room air conditioners are products that are mounted in a window or through
`
`a wall for the purpose of providing refrigeration, and potentially heating and ventilation, to
`
`a room.
`
`82. DOE last amended the energy conservation standards for room air
`
`conditioners on April 21, 2011. 76 Fed. Reg. 22,454 (Apr. 21, 2011).
`
`83. Under 42 U.S.C. § 6295(m)(1), DOE was required, no later than April 21,
`
`2017, to review the room air conditioner standards and either propose amended standards
`
`or make a determination that amendments were not necessary.
`
`84. DOE missed that deadline, which is now more than three years overdue.
`
`85. DOE’s missed deadline constitutes a failure to perform a nondiscretionary act
`
`or duty in violation of EPCA. 42 U.S.C. § 6305(a)(2).
`
`SIXTH CLAIM FOR RELIEF
`
`(Oil Furnaces and Weatherized Gas Furnaces)
`
`86.
`
`Plaintiffs incorporate by reference paragraphs 1 through 56.
`
`87. Residential oil furnaces are products that use heating oil to generate heat and
`
`are designed to be the primary heating source for a home. “Weatherized” furnaces are
`
`furnaces that are intended to be installed outdoors.
`
`88. DOE last amended the energy conservation standards for oil furnaces and
`
`weatherized gas furnaces on June 27, 2011. 76 Fed. Reg. 37,408 (June 27, 2011).
`
`
`
`17
`
`
`
`Case 1:20-cv-09127-AJN Document 1 Filed 10/30/20 Page 18 of 32
`
`89. Under 42 U.S.C. § 6295(m)(1), DOE was required, no later than June 27,
`
`2017, to review the oil furnace and weatherized gas furnace standards and either propose
`
`amended standards or make a determination that amendments were not necessary.
`
`90. DOE missed that deadline, which is now more than three years overdue.
`
`91. DOE’s missed deadline constitutes a failure to perform a nondiscretionary act
`
`or duty in violation of EPCA. 42 U.S.C. § 6305(a)(2).
`
`SEVENTH CLAIM FOR RELIEF
`
`(Residential Refrigerators and Freezers)
`
`92.
`
`Plaintiffs incorporate by reference paragraphs 1 through 56.
`
`93. DOE last amended the energy conservation standards for residential
`
`refrigerators and freezers on September 15, 2011. 76 Fed. Reg. 57,516 (Sept. 15, 2011).
`
`94. Under 42 U.S.C. § 6295(m)(1), DOE was required, no later than September
`
`15, 2017, to review the residential refrigerator and freezer standards and either propose
`
`amended standards or make a determination that amendments were not necessary.
`
`95. DOE missed that deadline, which is now more than three years overdue.
`
`96. DOE’s missed deadline constitutes a failure to perform a nondiscretionary act
`
`or duty in violation of EPCA. 42 U.S.C. § 6305(a)(2).
`
`EIGHTH CLAIM FOR RELIEF
`
`(Fluorescent Lamp Ballasts)
`
`97.
`
`98.
`
`Plaintiffs incorporate by reference paragraphs 1 through 56.
`
`Fluorescent lamp ballasts are devices that provide the voltage and current to
`
`operate fluorescent light bulbs.
`
`
`
`18
`
`
`
`Case 1:20-cv-09127-AJN Document 1 Filed 10/30/20 Page 19 of 32
`
`99. DOE last amended the energy conservation standards for fluorescent lamp
`
`ballasts on November 14, 2011. 76 Fed. Reg. 70,548 (Nov. 14, 2011).
`
`100. Under 42 U.S.C. § 6295(m)(1), DOE was required, no later than November
`
`14, 2017, to review the fluorescent lamp ballast standards and either propose amended
`
`standards or make a determination that amendments were not necessary.
`
`101. DOE missed that deadline, which is nearly three years overdue.
`
`102. DOE’s missed deadline constitutes a failure to perform a nondiscretionary act
`
`or duty in violation of EPCA. 42 U.S.C. § 6305(a)(2).
`
`NINTH CLAIM FOR RELIEF
`
` (Water-cooled and Evaporatively-cooled Commercial Air Conditioners)
`
`103. Plaintiffs incorporate by reference paragraphs 1 through 56.
`
`104. Water-cooled commercial air conditioners are air conditioners that use a
`
`circuit of water to remove heat from condenser coils. Evaporatively-cooled commercial air
`
`conditioners are air conditioners that remove heat from their condenser coils by evaporating
`
`water.
`
`105. DOE last amended the energy conservation standards for water-cooled and
`
`evaporatively-cooled commercial air conditio