(a) The Congress finds that—

(1) the fastest, most cost-effective, and most environmentally sound way to prevent future energy shortages in the United States, while reducing the Nation’s dependence on imported energy supplies, is to encourage and facilitate, through major programs, the implementation of energy conservation and renewable-resource energy measures with respect to dwelling units, nonresidential buildings, and industrial plants;

(2) current efforts to encourage and facilitate such measures are inadequate as a consequence of—

(A) a lack of adequate and available financing for such measures, particularly with respect to individual consumers and owners of small businesses;

(B) a shortage of reliable and impartial information and advisory services pertaining to practicable energy conservation measures and renewable-resource energy measures and the cost savings that are likely if they are implemented in such units, buildings, and plants; and

(C) the absence of organized programs which, if they existed, would enable consumers, especially individuals and owners of small businesses, to undertake such measures easily and with confidence in their economic value;

(3) major programs of financial incentives and assistance for energy conservation measures and renewable-resource energy measures in dwelling units, nonresidential buildings, and industrial plants would—

(A) significantly reduce the Nation’s demand for energy and the need for petroleum imports;

(B) cushion the adverse impact of the high price of energy supplies on consumers, particularly elderly and handicapped low-income persons who cannot afford to make the modifications necessary to reduce their residential energy use; and

(C) increase, directly and indirectly, job opportunities and national economic output;

(4) the primary responsibility for the implementation of such major programs should be lodged with the governments of the States; the diversity of conditions among the various States and regions of the Nation is sufficiently great that a wholly federally administered program would not be as effective as one which is tailored to meet local requirements and to respond to local opportunities; the State should be allowed flexibility within which to fashion such programs, subject to general Federal guidelines and monitoring sufficient to protect the financial investments of consumers and the financial interest of the United States and to insure that the measures undertaken in fact result in significant energy and cost savings which would probably not otherwise occur;

(5) to the extent that direct Federal administration is more economical and efficient, direct Federal financial incentives and assistance should be extended through existing and proven Federal programs rather than through new programs that would necessitate new and separate administrative bureaucracies; and

(6) such programs should be designed and administered to supplement, and not to supplant or in any other way conflict with, State energy conservation programs under part C of title III of the Energy Policy and Conservation Act [42 U.S.C. 6321 et seq.]; the emergency energy conservation program carried out by community action agencies pursuant to section 2809(a)(12) ¹ of this title; and other forms of assistance and encouragement for energy conservation.

Ask a legal question, get an answer ASAP!
Click here to chat with a lawyer about your rights.

(b) It is, therefore, the purpose of this subchapter to encourage and facilitate the implementation of energy conservation measures and renewable-resource energy measures in dwelling units, nonresidential buildings, and industrial plants, through—

(1) supplemental State energy conservation plans; and

(2) Federal financial incentives and assistance.