DOE Proposes Significant Efficiency Rollbacks – But Don't Celebrate Just Yet

In a sweeping series of notices, the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE or the Department) has proposed to significantly walk back regulations for 20 consumer and commercial products under the Appliance and Equipment Standards Program [1]. In particular, the notices propose to withdraw covered product determinations and either roll back or rescind existing test procedures and energy and/or water standards. If finalized, the withdrawal could significantly affect manufacturers that had expended considerable resources to design products that met these efficiency standards.

During the first Trump Administration, efforts to delay the adoption of energy efficiency rulemakings were challenged by NGOs and several states [2]. We expect the current proposals to be opposed and, if finalized, challenged. Indeed, Congress included an “anti-backsliding” prohibition in the Energy Policy and Conservation Act (EPCA), which prevents DOE from amending existing standards to increase the maximum allowable energy or water use or decrease the minimum efficiency standard of a covered product [3]. At least one circuit court has held that this provision of the EPCA must, based on the plain language of the statute, be read to restrict DOE's subsequent discretionary ability to weaken a standard at any point after publication in the Federal Register [4].

Table 1 below sets out the standards DOE proposes to change by:
(i) withdrawing prior determinations that products not otherwise enumerated under the EPCA constitute “covered products.” Removal of coverage would invalidate any associated efficiency standards, test procedures, and certification requirements for these products;

(ii) rescinding efficiency standards established by rule; or

(iii) rescinding standards where the rule established more stringent requirements than by statute, effectively, restoring the statutory standard.

For many of the products identified in Table 1, the existence of a federal standard has insulated companies from the potential for more stringent state standards as states are expressly preempted from setting efficiency standards for products that DOE regulates [5]. Any categories of consumer products eliminated by these actions from the federal Energy Conservation Program, however, could become subject to state energy efficiency standards. For example, California regulated small and large battery chargers prior to adoption of federal efficiency standards. Once the federal standard was adopted [6], it preempted the state-regulated product standard for a subset of these products [7]. If DOE finalizes a rule to withdraw the federal standard for battery chargers, California will be well-positioned to reassert jurisdiction over the broader category of battery chargers.

Elimination of federal standards could pose marketing challenges for manufacturers, as certain industry segments will no longer be compelled to follow a uniform test procedure or means of expressing the efficiency of their products. It is unclear whether the administration also intends to roll back the Federal Trade Commission’s Energy Labeling Rule, but in any event, that rule only prescribes labeling and/or marking requirements for certain DOE-regulated consumer appliance products [8].

Significant concerns have also been raised in response to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA or the Agency) plans to eliminate the Office of Atmospheric Protection, which houses the Energy Star Program [9]. The Agency has yet to issue a public statement on the fate of the program, but a host of stakeholders, including senators, manufacturers, and various industry trade groups, have written Administrator Lee Zeldin and Secretary Chris Wright to encourage them to retain Energy Star [10]. Although it has been argued that termination of Energy Star would require Congressional action, as the Energy Policy Act of 2005 merely codified the existing voluntary program and EPA’s role [11], the need for legislation to terminate a voluntary program is uncertain. Nevertheless, termination of Energy Star would be a sea-change for the appliance sector as the program and its iconic logo are recognized not only in the U.S. but also abroad.

A case in point is Canada, which has closely tied its energy efficiency program to the U.S. Natural Resources Canada (NRCan) incorporates aspects of the U.S. energy efficiency framework into its own Energy Efficiency Regulations [12]. NRCan also administers the use of the Energy Star mark in Canada through an Administrative Agreement with EPA and DOE. It is uncertain how finalization of the U.S. proposal would affect Canadian requirements and further complicate compliance with energy efficiency standards across the two countries.

DOE is accepting comments on the proposal for a few more weeks, or until July 15, 2025. Please do not hesitate to contact us if you have questions about how the proposed efficiency standard rollbacks may impact your products.

[1] 42 U.S.C. § § 6291, et seq.

[2] See e.g., NRDC, et al. v. Perry, 940 F.3d 1072 (9th Cir. 2019) and Natural Resources Defense Council v. Granholm, No. 20-cv-9127 (S.D.N.Y. filed October 30, 2020).

[3] 42 U.S.C. § 6295(o)(1).

[4] See Natural Resources Defense Council v. Abram, 355 F.3d 179 (2d Cir. 2004).

[5] 42 U.S.C. 6297(b) (EPCA provides that “no State regulation, or revision thereof, concerning the energy efficiency, energy use, or water use of the covered product shall be effective with respect to such covered product,” except in limited situations).

[6] 81 Fed. Reg. 38,265 (June 13, 2016).

[7] California’s state standards for non-federally regulated battery chargers can be found at 20 Cal. Code Reg. § 1605.3(w).

[8] 16 C.F.R. § 305.1.

[9] See EPA Announces Next Phase of Organizational Improvements to Better Integrate Science into Agency Offices, Deliver Clean Air, Land, and Water to All Americans (May 2, 2025), https://www.epa.gov/newsreleases/epa-announces-next-phase-organizational-improvements-better-integrate-science-agency.

[10] See e.g., Letter from U.S. Senators to Admin. Zeldin and Sec. Wright (May 20, 2025); Letter from U.S. Real Estate Industry to Sec. Wright (May 14, 2025); Letter from AHRI, et al. to Admin. Zeldin (March 20, 2025).

[11] 42 U.S.C. § 6294a.

[12] Indeed, NRCan’s recent publication of Amendment 18, inter alia, expands the use of “ambulatory,” or automatic, incorporation of U.S. standards into the Energy Efficiency Regulations.