BACK | HOME

NASEO News

February 2004

Energy Efficiency: FY2005 Budget and Policy Review

Posted: February 25, 2004

The House Renewable Energy and Energy Efficiency Caucus, the Sustainable Energy Coalition and the Environmental and Energy Study Institute (EESI) held a Congressional briefing on the implications of the Administration's FY 2005 budget request on energy efficiency R&D investments and deployment programs, as well as key energy efficiency policy issues pending before the Congress on Thursday, February 19, 2004. Jeff Genzer, NASEO Counsel, participated on the panel with a discussion regarding the budget request for the energy efficiency deployment activities.  Mr. Genzer provided many of the 80-plus audience members with the State Energy Program and Activities Update and the Oak Ridge National Laboratory State Energy Program report.  Bill Prindle, Deputy Director, American Council for an Energy-Efficient Economy, and Eli Hopson, Professional Staff (Majority), House Science Subcommittee on Energy, also participated on the panel.  Their presentations and further information on the briefing can be accessed here.  For Mr. Genzer’s full presentation, click here.

Domenici Introduces New Energy Bill, S.2095

Posted: February 19, 2004

Senate Energy & Natural Resources Chairman Pete V. Domenici’s new energy bill, S. 2095, which was introduced February 12, 2004, for Senate consideration in two weeks is expected to score at 45 percent of the cost of the old bill – approximately $14 billion – while achieving most of the goals achieved by the old bill. Access the full press release here. Click here to view the bill. Highlights of S.2095 include:

• Reauthorization of the State Energy Program;
• Reauthorization of the Weatherization program;
• Reauthorization of the renewable energy production incentive program;
• Authorization of the creation of an Electric Reliability Organizations to establish and enforce mandatory reliability rules;
• Repeals PURPA’s mandatory purchase requirement, an onerous federal requirement that has discouraged competition and resulted in high costs to consumers;
• Repeals the Public Utility Holding Company Act, an outdated federal law that has discouraged modernization of America’s transmission grid;
• Provides a credit for the purchase of new qualified fuel cell, hybrid, or other alternative fuel motor vehicle;
• Provides new deduction for energy-efficient commercial building property expenditures;
• Provides a new credit for the production of energy-efficient clothes washers and refrigerators; and,
• Requires a renewable fuel content for gasoline started at 3.1 billion gallons in 2005 and increasing to 5.0 billion gallons in 2012. This requirement is met through either the direct use of renewable fuel or the purchase of credits generated by those exceeding their specified allocation.

NASEO Washington Outreach Meetings Deliver Message of State Energy Program’s Successes

Posted: February 19, 2004

This year’s NASEO Energy Outlook Conference in Washington, DC, included the largest number of federal and Congressional outreach meetings yet by the organization. NASEO staff coordinated meetings with key Senate and House committee staff so that State Energy Directors could directly inform decision makers about the success of their energy initiatives and the State Energy Program (SEP). State Energy Directors also met with the National Governors Association and conducted meetings with their own Congressional delegations. In all, more than 30 State Energy Directors participated in the February 9, 2004, outreach meetings. Of special note was the personal Oval Office visit of Rick Grice, Director of the Colorado Energy Office, with President George Bush.

Domenici Introduces Lean Energy Bill

Posted: February 13, 2004

Senate Energy and Natural Resources Chairman Pete V. Domenici introduced his new energy bill on February 12, 2004, in the wake of an agreement reached between Majority Leader Bill Frist and Senate Minority Leader Tom Daschle that the bill would be considered swiftly, in a constrained fashion and with as few amendments as possible. The new energy bill is S. 2095. Majority Leader Frist and Minority Leader Daschle submitted a colloquy into the record tonight outlining the agreement reached by the two leaders in a meeting earlier today. The leaner energy bill includes the tax package passed by the Senate Finance Committee in May, 2003. The estimated cost of the tax package is reduced to below $15 billion by delaying the implementation of most provisions until later this year.

The estimated cost of the total bill is less than $14 billion, taking into account the $1.245 billion savings in the authorizing portion of the package. The new bill costs less than half of the estimated $31 billion cost of the old bill. The bill was introduced under Rule 14, which meant it will be immediately placed on the Senate calendar where it can be brought to the Senate floor for consideration at any time without the need to go through the committee process. However, a Rule 14 process is a two-day process, so this will not be completed until the Senate returns from the President’s Day recess.

DOE-EERE Budget Presented in Washington

Posted: February 3, 2004

At a briefing for stakeholders attended by NASEO staff last evening, February 02, 2004, Assistant Secretary of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy David Garman responded to questions about the President’s FY’2005 EERE Budget. Of great interest to NASEO members is the President’s budget request for the State Energy Program of $40.798 million (below last year’s appropriation of $44.5 million, but above last year’s request of $38 million).

The President’s FY’2005 request for Weatherization is $291.2 million (above last year’s appropriation of $228 million and above last year’s request of $288 million). Deployment program funding of particular interest is included in the table below.

To access a budget detail on the FY’2005 budget for the Office of Weatherization and Intergovernmental Programs click here.

The total energy conservation request is $875.933 million, down from the $888.937 million provided last year. Another change of note is the Industrial Technology Program with an FY’2005 request of $58.1 million ($34.9 million below last year’s appropriation of $93.068 million). Additional budget information will be provided by NASEO over the next several days and at the Energy Outlook Conference next week.

Domenici Instructs Staff to Trim Energy Bill

Posted: February 3, 2004

Senate Energy and Natural Resources Chairman Pete V. Domenici reacted to the President’s budget on February 2, 2004, by announcing plans to significantly reduce the cost of the energy bill and return a leaner bill to the floor later this month. In a prepared statement, Chairman Domenici said, “The budget the President sent to the Hill today is a tough one, but it reflects economic realities. It is necessary, in light of current deficit numbers, to trim spending every way that we can. After nearly 30 years on the Senate Budget Committee and my successful passage of the Balanced Budget Act, trimming the energy bill will be a simple, straightforward process. I plan to trim the cost of this bill while keeping its core provisions in tact. I remain committed to passing comprehensive energy legislation through the Senate. No single provision in this bill solves our energy challenges. We need a comprehensive approach that helps us conserve energy, increase production and diversify our fuel supplies. Anything less falls far short of the national energy policy this country urgently needs. I am disappointed with other aspects of the Administration’s budget. I am disappointed that the Office of Science took a 2 percent cut, especially in light of specific guidance from my energy and water development appropriations subcommittee to do just the opposite. I also consider the decision to decimate nuclear energy R&D short-sighted. America is poised to reinvest in nuclear energy as part of a larger strategy to move away from our over-reliance on natural gas. Nuclear energy is clean, reliable and affordable. We are planning the construction of new nuclear power plants and the implementation of improved waste strategies. Slashing nuclear R&D could undermine that larger effort.”

< back to top >