S-5338-119
Read twice and referred to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources.
Sponsored by Mike Lee (R-UT)
What it does
This bill would amend the Energy Policy and Conservation Act to impose new procedural and substantive limits on the Department of Energy's ability to issue or amend energy conservation standards for consumer and commercial products. It would void two specific 2023 DOE rules on furnaces and commercial water heaters, require higher evidentiary standards ("clear and convincing evidence") before DOE can weaken or tighten standards, extend compliance timelines, permanently bar new standards for distribution transformers, and preempt state and local laws restricting fuel type or requiring product removal based on emissions.
Who benefits
Manufacturers of gas-fired appliances (furnaces, water heaters) and traditional fuel-based equipment; natural gas utilities and the gas industry; small manufacturers who would benefit from delayed or blocked compliance deadlines; states seeking regulatory certainty for industry; consumers who prefer to keep using less efficient but cheaper or familiar appliances in the near term.
Who is hurt
Consumers who could see higher long-term energy costs from delayed efficiency improvements; states and localities (including California and others with building electrification or emissions ordinances) that would lose authority to regulate fuel type or emissions-based product restrictions; manufacturers of high-efficiency and electric appliances who lose a regulatory driver for market share; environmental and public health advocates concerned about emissions from less efficient equipment; DOE itself, which faces sharply reduced rulemaking discretion.
Supporters argue
Supporters argue that DOE's efficiency rulemakings have imposed costly mandates that eliminate popular product features, drive up upfront appliance prices, and sometimes lack rigorous cost-benefit justification, pointing to the voided furnace and water heater rules as examples of standards that reduced consumer choice. They contend that requiring "clear and convincing evidence," longer test-procedure lead times, and preemption of a patchwork of state fuel-restriction laws would provide manufacturers and consumers with predictability and prevent states from banning gas appliances outright.
Opponents argue
Opponents argue that raising the evidentiary bar to "clear and convincing evidence" and mandating multi-year delays would effectively freeze efficiency progress, locking in higher energy bills and emissions for decades, particularly by permanently barring updated standards for distribution transformers. They contend that broadly preempting state and local fuel-use and emissions-based rules — even after a federal standard is revoked — intrudes on traditional state and local police powers over building codes and environmental protection, echoing concerns previously raised about broad federal preemption clauses.