- Residential Market
- Light Commercial Market
- Commercial Market
- Indoor Air Quality
- Components & Accessories
- Residential Controls
- Commercial Controls
- Testing, Monitoring, Tools
- Services, Apps & Software
- Standards & Legislation
- EXTRA EDITION
The motion echoes comments made by Heating, Air-conditioning & Refrigeration Distributors International (HARDI) regarding the uncertainty the deadline has brought upon the HVACR industry.
HARDI will be filing a response in support of the motion to stay or delay the deadline.
The motion is necessary, the groups argue, because the court has yet to accept a proposed settlement between the American Public Gas Association (APGA) and the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE). Until the settlement is accepted, the May 1 compliance date remains on the calendar. There is no timetable for when the court will rule on either issue.
Also awaiting a resolution is HR 367, the Regulations from the Executive in Need of Scrutiny (REINS) Act. The REINS Act would require any federal rule or regulation with an economic impact of $100 million or more to come before Congress for an up-or-down vote before it could take effect. The Subcommittee on Regulatory Reform, Commercial, and Antitrust Law passed the bill, which will now head to the full House Committee on the Judiciary.
“Regulatory reform is long overdue, especially at a time when our economy struggles to recover,” said U.S. Rep. Todd Young, R-Ind., who introduced the bill. “In order to spur growth and increase the incomes of middle-class Americans, the role of the federal government should be to remove barriers to economic expansion. Unfortunately, we seem to see more barriers being placed than removed, largely because Congress has a tendency to pass vague legislation that results in federal agencies writing regulations to fill in the blanks.
“Too often those regulations are burdensome and too far removed from public scrutiny. The REINS Act would ensure that Americans affected by regulations could weigh in on regulations before they were enacted, and would remove the incentive for Congress to pass ambiguous legislation in the first place.”
Publication date: 4/8/2013