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.
“SECRETARY PENA'S NOMINATION” mentioning the U.S. Dept. of Energy was published in the Senate section on pages S2295-S2296 on March 13, 1997.
The publication is reproduced in full below:
SECRETARY PENA'S NOMINATION
Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, I want to take a moment to express my concern with the Department of Energy's handling of the appliance energy efficiency standards regulations. My concerns regarding this matter are well known. In the last Congress, I authored an amendment to impose a 1-year moratorium on new DOE appliance standards rulemaking activities. That action became necessary because it was clear that DOE's energy efficiency standards program was placing jobs and investment in the manufacturing industry at risk, not just in Kentucky, but in other States around the Nation.
DOE's response to the moratorium was an interpretive rule that was designed to institutionalize a variety of reforms. While I commend DOE for identifying and correcting their own shortcomings, DOE's first test is before us now in the form of new energy efficiency standards for refrigerators. In my estimation, DOE deserves a failing grade.
I have raised the refrigerator standards issue with Secretary Pena during his confirmation hearing before the Senate Energy Committee, but I have not received a satisfactory answer to my questions. While I realize Secretary Pena did not create this controversy, Congress will hold Secretary Pena responsible for the outcome and the consequences of this rulemaking.
Mr. President, I am disturbed by the fact that DOE has changed its position outlined in the August 1996, notice of proposed rulemaking, which established a 2003 standard as its preferred option. This option was supported by manufacturers. DOE has since changed its position and now supports implementing the new standards for refrigerators in the year 2000. As a result of this flip-flop, manufacturers will be required to make costly investments twice--once to comply with the DOE energy standards in 2000, and again when regulations mandate the elimination of HCFC insulation as required in the year 2003.
Mr. President, it is important to note that these burdensome and duplicative regulations are not necessary. Once it was determined that DOE was not going to abide by its preferred option, manufacturers offered a good-faith compromise that would set a more stringent level of energy savings than proposed by DOE to be implemented in 2003. This proposal would save more energy while minimizing the reengineering and regulatory burden, which will add unnecessary costs to manufacturers and consumers.
What is more disturbing is that DOE has ignored its own contractor's analysis in setting these standards. I am informed that the analysis by Lawrence Berkeley Laboratories confirms that the energy savings attributable to the 2003 standard would exceed the benefits of the 2000 standards. Unfortunately, DOE has chosen to ignore this analysis and not include it in establishing these standards.
Mr. President, this is not the only procedural defect in DOE's proposed rule. The Department has failed to comply with the requirements of law regarding the Department of Justice's role in this rulemaking. DOE has failed to obtain an updated competitive impact determination from the Department of Justice that takes into account new evidence of the potential impact of the proposed rule. I believe such analysis is essential to maintaining a competitive marketplace.
Mr. President, considering the latest analysis by DOE's own contractor, it has become apparent to me that this battle is no longer about securing the greatest energy savings. Rather, it seems this is about punishing manufacturers more than a legitimate or responsible basis for regulation. The only regulation that makes sense is one that takes effect in 2003.
This controversy raises fundamental questions about whether DOE will faithfully administer the appliance standards program as currently authorized. I will continue to follow this matter very closely and keep my legislative option open.
I urge Secretary Pena to assume responsibility for assuring that the law is properly applied and the correct decision reached.
____________________
