The Congressional Record is a unique source of public documentation. It started in 1873, documenting nearly all the major and minor policies being discussed and debated.
“CONFERENCE REPORT ON H.R. 1977” mentioning the U.S. Dept. of Energy was published in the Senate section on pages S17931 on Dec. 4, 1995.
The publication is reproduced in full below:
CONFERENCE REPORT ON H.R. 1977
Mr. MACK. I would like to engage in a colloquy with my colleague from Kentucky, Senator McConnell. Activities funded under the Department of Energy's Codes and Standards Program are primarily concentrated in two sub-programs known as Lighting and Appliances and Building Standards and Guidelines. However, as is clear in the Department of Energy's budget, its activities within these two programs extend to areas outside of that which might be assumed under their titles. This would include setting standards for commercial equipment electric motors, as well as the advocacy of minimum energy codes for residential buildings. Therefore, it was my understanding that the intent of the amendment to H.R. 1977 that placed a 1-year time-out on Department of Energy's use of funds to propose, issue, or prescribe any new or amended standard would extend to Department of Energy's activities in advocating changes to minimum codes for residential energy use.
Mr. McCONNELL. My colleague is correct. While not specifically spelled out in the statutory language of H.R. 1977, it was my intent that this 1-year time-out extended to the entire program as it related to the establishment of minimum standards and codes. I had hoped that this clarification would be made in the conference report, but since there is no report language addressing this issue, I feel it necessary to clarify it here for the record. Indeed, product manufacturers have raised concerns over the methodology and assumptions in Department of Energy's current cost benefit analysis. Similarly, builders have raised concerns over the minimum mandatory standards found in codes enacted by local municipalities or States that use the voluntary products of code and standard organizations over which Department of Energy has significant influence. Builders have told me that these standards are often not responsive to technological innovation, customer needs, or economic consideration of affordability or payback. Therefore, just as there needs to be a time out to review standards-setting activities conducted by the Department of Energy, the same review should apply to its activities relating to residential building codes.
Mr. MACK. I appreciate this clarification. Indeed, considering that the House language eliminated funding for the entire Codes and Standards program, the intent is clear that the House aimed to institute this 1-year time out on Department of Energy's activities in the standards arena as well as in standards which are part of the codes as well as the standards arena. I think it is important that, since the House agreed to recede to Senate language on this issue, which restored the funds cut by the House, that the Senate ensure that the spirit of the House language be carried out.
Mr. McCONNELL. I would also point out that as means of reaching agreement on Senate language, I was asked to include a caveat stating that the Federal Government was not precluded from promulgating rules concerning energy efficiency standards for the construction of new federally owned commercial and residential buildings. By expressly carving out federally owned buildings, this would indicate further that standards and codes for all other buildings, and thereby privately owned structures, would be covered. It should also be clear that it is not the intent of this language to prevent promulgation of the national Home Energy Rating System voluntary guidelines.
____________________
