Remarks on the Government Accountability Office's Report on Efficiency Standards
U.S. Department of Energy Assistant Secretary for Energy Efficiency & Renewable Energy Alexander Karsner's remarks as prepared for the press conference with Congressmen Dingell, Boucher, and Markey at the release of the Government Accountability Office's Report:
Energy Efficiency: Long-Standing Problems with DOE's Program for Setting Efficiency Standards to Continue to Result in Forgone Energy Savings.
March 1, 2007
Good morning. I want to extend my thanks to Chairman Dingell for inviting me to participate this morning, and to Chairman Boucher and Mr. Markey for their strong leadership on this important issue.
Since arriving at the Department of Energy last March, I have made efficiency standards a top priority, and I can tell you that it is a priority for Secretary Bodman as well.
The Chairman was generous when he said the results are not good. Until Secretary Bodman came on board, the Department's track record for meeting statutory deadlines under this program has been abysmal ever since the program was established in the 1980s. There is no other word for it. Both Secretary Bodman and I find it unacceptable performance. But he has put us on a path to change that.
The frustration felt by Congress, and by many of you in the audience, is amply justified. And I know there is a lot of skepticism that DOE can fix this long standing problem. Certainly, GAO's assessment of DOE performance prior to enactment of EPACT 2005 is crystal clear.
I am here today to explain that the national story on meeting efficiency standards deadlines is improving. We are demonstrating concrete, progress, and I intend to maintain and where possible accelerate that momentum.
In the last year, we have engaged in open, honest and positive dialogue with Congress, and with the stakeholders, to ensure that government keeps its commitments. The past is indefensible, but we must—and we are—moving forward.
The Department of Energy's energy efficiency standards program is an extraordinarily important one. The standards are a key way that Americans save energy; for example, through 2030 the standards program will save 55.4 quads of energy.
The GAO's report on the Department's energy efficiency standards details the history of the program and describes delays since the program's inception three decades earlier. Past delays are the result of many factors over many years—they cannot be traced to a single administration, management team, staff member or office; but the cumulative result compels us to re-examine all aspects of the process for improvement.
One cannot defend that history. It is important, however, to understand it and give it some context. Energy efficiency standard setting is—by statute—a complex process requiring careful analysis of a broad range of technical and economic issues, and also requiring full review of these analyses, both within the Government and by a broad range of stakeholders—and so isolating one link in the chain is insufficient to analyze the necessary solution as a whole.
Moreover, the report does not capture the forward progress the Department has made since the Energy Policy Act of 2005 was enacted. Secretary Bodman made this program a personal priority over the past 18 months, and the program has achieved significant results in that time.
On January 31, 2006, the Department submitted a report to Congress on its standards activities—but most importantly, with that report we submitted our action plan and schedule for rulemakings to remove the backlog and deal with new standards over the next five years. That plan and schedule is publicly available online at www.buildings.gov with a BIG BLUE BUTTON at the bottom.
Since committing to this schedule for the standards program, the Department has met 100% of its obligations. The GAO report concurs with our schedule; GAO rated DOE's plan highly.
Since EPACT 2005 was passed, we have completed eight rulemakings and made significant progress on four others; during the last year, our office began standards rulemakings for 20 products. This represents an unusually ambitious pace of output that is unprecedented in our history and has never before been achieved at DOE.
DOE's senior leadership has shown a strong commitment to improving this program. In three successive years we have requested budget increases:
- in 2006 we requested $8.25 million
- in 2007, we asked for $11.925 million
- and for 2008 we've asked for $13.639 million for this program. An increase of approximately 65% over the last two years.
These increased resources help, but as importantly we have also looked at streamlining and better managing our internal processes.
First, we are bundling similar products together to move them collectively through the rulemaking process. For example, the final rule for four home appliances (dishwashers, ranges and ovens, dehumidifiers, and commercial clothes washers) is scheduled for March 2009. These products will move as a group, rather than getting bogged down in four separate rulemakings.
Additionally, we have organized staff and contractors into seven technology teams to focus on similar areas together—those areas are heating, transformers and motors, lighting, home appliances, space cooling, commercial refrigeration, and battery chargers and external power supplies.
This approach helps dedicate and deploy our human capital in the most efficient manner possible, so that while internal and external reviews take place, the team can continuously focus on new and other tasks in the same rulemaking pipeline.
Just this week—as was noted—we've asked Congress for fast track rulemaking authority. This legislative proposal would give DOE the authority to streamline the rulemaking process further and faster when consensus among relevant parties (including state officials, energy advocates, and manufacturers) clearly exists; and we are appealing to both sides to work together on this.
This would allow DOE to go directly from Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking to a Direct Final Rule in cases where a consensus standard is independently negotiated and proposed by the affected stakeholders—saving precious time, resources, and most importantly, PRECIOUS ENERGY.
Our estimates indicate that expedited rulemaking can eliminate at least 10 months from the full timeline for EACH consensus rule, a reduction of nearly one-third. Mr. Chairman, I look forward to working with you on this proposal.
It is my hope that future GAO reports reflect upon these times, as a period of dynamic change and achievement in our approach to appliance efficiency standards.
So we are making solid progress to aggressively reform management systems and cultivate an atmosphere among stakeholders of confidence and consensus building to address this national priority with the urgency it merits. We will stay on schedule as a commitment to the American people and whenever possible we will move faster. Finally, we will engage collaboratively with leaders in Congress like the gentlemen you have heard from today to seek legislative fixes that iron potential ambiguities, technicalities, or impediments to achieving better standards in a timely way.
I look forward to working with Congress and discussing other ways to improve our process and ultimately to SAVE ENERGY.