Arlington, VA – 09/12/2011 – The Consumer Electronics Association (CEA)^® applauds the California legislature and Senators Calderon and Pavley for passing Senate Bill 617, legislation that includes provisions requiring state agencies to review thoroughly major regulations and consider how proposed rules would impact business investment, innovation and jobs.

"SB 617, the result of recent negotiations, is a limited but important first step toward addressing the regulatory problems we have witnessed at the California Energy Commission during the past several years," said Douglas Johnson, CEA vice president of technology policy. "Even as the legislature passes this bill, which is limited to larger rulemakings and would not take effect until 2013, we are seeing other redundant, costly and unjustified regulations being developed in California."

Earlier this year, the California Energy Commission's (CEC) regulation for televisions took effect, despite the fact that significant energy savings in televisions had already been achieved as a result of industry innovation, competition and the ENERGY STAR program at the national level.

Research commissioned by CEA has found that innovation, competition and ENERGY STAR have reduced the amount of power needed per unit of screen size 63 percent for LCD TVs from 2003 to 2010 and 41 percent for plasma TVs from 2008 to 2010. Furthermore, a recent paper in the California Journal of Politics and Policy, authored by C. Paul Wazzan and Dawn E. Eash of the Berkeley Research Group, found that the CEC made significant economic, math, data and logic errors in reaching its conclusions. The CEC finalized and issued its TV efficiency regulation despite having been made aware of these flaws in their analysis.

"Strong enforcement of the key provisions in SB 617 will be important, including those related to regulatory impacts on innovation and jobs, more rigorous economic assessments by agencies, and proper assessment of alternatives to regulation," said Johnson. "Also important is the role of the Office of Administrative Law in rejecting a proposed regulation  based on these considerations."