PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Committee on Energy and Natural Resources. Hearings held. Hearings printed: S.Hrg. 111-24.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in Senate · Mar 16, 2009
Appliance Standards Improvement Act of 2009 - Amends the Energy Policy and Conservation Act to authorize any person to petition the Secretary of Energy to prescribe or amend test procedures that are used to measure energy use by: (1) covered products under the Department of Energy's (DOE's) energy conservation program for consumer products; and (2) certain industrial equipment. Requires DOE to respond to petitions within 180 days and publish a rule on the standard within three years if a petition is granted.
Revises the Energy Star Program by: (1) requiring the Secretary and the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to update agreements that delineate DOE and EPA responsibilities; (2) expanding the duties of the Secretary and the Administrator, to include reviewing product categories at least once every three years or when market share for a category reaches 35%, updating product criteria for categories, requiring qualified products to demonstrate compliance with criteria, and developing standardized building energy audit methods; and (3) authorizing appropriations for the Program.
Requires test procedures for LED fixtures and LED light engines to be based on Illuminating Engineering Society of North America test procedure LM-79, Approved Method for Electrical and Photometric Testing of Solid-State Lighting Devices.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Establishes minimum energy efficiency standards for portable light fixtures manufactured on or after January 1, 2012. Phases out the use of incandescent light bulbs in portable light fixtures. Excludes a GU-24 base lamp from the definition of an incandescent lamp. Prohibits GU-24 adaptors from adapting a GU-24 socket to any other line voltage socket.
Requires the Secretary to conduct studies on: (1) compliance with appliance energy standards; and (2) the costs and benefits of requiring high-quality, direct-current electricity supply in certain buildings.
Requires the Secretary to assess the use of electric motors and the electric motor market in the United States and establish a program to increase awareness of higher efficiency electric motors.
People & committees
Sen. Bingaman, Jeff [D-NM] · D–NM
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Committee on Energy and Natural Resources. Hearings held. Hearings printed: S.Hrg. 111-24.
Read twice and referred to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources. (text of measure as introduced: CR S3117-3119)
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR S3116-3117)
Introduced in Senate
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
Source last updated: Sep 8, 2026. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.
AI Conversation Starters
Choose a perspective, copy a prompt, and paste it into your preferred AI. Each prompt includes the bill version and available official source links, and asks for counterarguments as well as supporting evidence.
Analyze S.598 as objectively as possible. Explain its main provisions, who would be affected, possible benefits and harms, implementation, exceptions, and uncertainties. Present the strongest arguments for and against it, and identify evidence needed to assess its public impact.
Examine S.598 through a progressive lens, focusing on fairness, access, economic inequality, and effects on vulnerable communities. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and distinguish stated goals from demonstrated outcomes.
Examine S.598 through a conservative lens, focusing on fiscal responsibility, institutional stability, federalism, and the scope of government. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and any provisions that challenge this perspective.
Examine S.598 through a civil-liberties and limited-government lens. Consider individual rights, privacy, voluntary choice, accountability, and government power. Explain tradeoffs, possible safeguards, and the strongest counterarguments without assuming the proposal is beneficial or harmful.