# 3

zE-- DE-i--ia

State Regulation of Electric Lamps Threatens National Energy Efficiency Standards To Be Established under the Energy Policy Act of 1992

National Electrical Manufacturers Association July 20, 1993



### Background of the National Energy Policy Act of 1992

In the Energy Policy Act of 1992, Congress made new types of products subject to federal energy efficiency standards, labeling rules, and test procedures. Congress recognized the need for a uniform federal policy that would establish energy efficiency standards that are technologically feasible, economically justified, and that would result in significant national energy savings. To ensure federal uniformity and to prevent undue burdens on interstate commerce, the Energy Policy Act built on predecessor laws to preempt new State regulations of products subject to federal regulatory authority.

General Service Incandescent Lamps

The Energy Policy Act brought all general service incandescent and fluorescent lamps under federal regulatory jurisdiction. However, the applicability of standards and labeling rules varies with different products. General service fluorescent and incandescent reflector lamps are subject to statutorily prescribed efficiency standards (which go into'effect after prescribed interim periods) and to FTC labeling rules, (to be issued by April 1994). Non-reflector, general service incandescent lamps, including common household A-line'lamps, are to be subject to a DOE rulemaking proceeding, to be initiated no later than April 1997, which will determine whether efficiency standards would be extended to some or all general service incandescent lamps. Non-reflector incandescent lamps, like general service fluorescent and reflector lamps, are subject to FTC labeling rules to be adopted by April 1994.

Effects of Diverse State Regulation of Incandescent Lamps

Several states have recently considered adopting efficiency standards and labeling rules applicable to non-reflector incandescent lamps. A Minnesota state agency has distributed draft regulations setting efficiency standards for non-reflector incandescent lamps. A California legislativecommittee recently considered, but did not approve, a bill that

would have established energy efficiency standards for many non-reflector, incandescent lamps. During congressional consideration of the Energy Policy Act, proposed legislation was introduced in Massachusetts to impose efficiency regulations on general service incandescent lamps. To date, this state legislation has not been enacted. In Vermont, legislation was passed in 1992 that states that if federal standards for incandescent lamps (plus other types) are not in effect by July 1995, the State will proceed with adoption of standards.

States such as Minnesota seem to believe that the preemption rules in the federal law do not apply to state regulation of non-reflector incandescent lamps. If one state, such as Minnesota, persists in adopting its own efficiency standards or labeling rules for general service incandescent lamps, the floodgates may open for other states to impose diverse and conflicting standards. Any state standards would disrupt national uniformity and would impose substantial burdens on manufacturers, consumers, and interstate commerce.

The reason Congress did not immediately prescribe efficiency standards for general service incandescent lamps and, instead, gave DOE regulatory authority to make a future determination of whether to impose such standards is to give the labeling requirements the opportunity to move lighting users toward more efficient lamps. Moreover, Congress recognized that only marginal efficiency improvements could be made on mature technologies, such as non-reflector incandescent lamps, but that significant energy savings exist for newer types of technologies, such as compact fluorescent lamps.

DOE must make a cost benefit study of the technological feasibility and economic justification of imposing standards on household incandescent lamps. Diverse and potentially conflicting state regulations will, in the interim four years (at most), cause great disruption to markets for these lamps. Manufacturers will incur substantial costs to comply with rules of individual states and will not be able to maintain a uniform product line or marketing strategy. Consumers everywhere may pay for efficiency objectives of only one or a few states.

- 2 -

H1501!SAM: 22685Steps DOE Might Take to Forestall State Regulation of Lamps

1. DOE might publicize to the 50 states its obligation and intent to make a determination prior to April 1997 on applying specific standards to general service incandescent lamps.

2. DOE might publicly espouse the federal interest in uniformity of lamp regulation and its concern with burdens on interstate commerce imposed by diverse state regulations.

3. DOE might adopt regulations that more explicitly apply statutory preemption provisions to all new state regulations of general service incandescent lamps, effective prior to DOE's 1997 determination to set standards for such lamps.

4. DOE might clarify that , come 1997, a determination to apply standards to some or all general service incandescent lamps absolutely triggers preemption of preexisting State regulations
, even as to lamps for which no federal standards are adopted.

3

H1501!.SAM;22685