Menu Search Account

LegiStorm

Get LegiStorm App Visit Product Demo Website
» Get LegiStorm App
» Get LegiStorm Pro Free Demo

Energy: State Energy Conservation Program Needs Reassessing

  Premium   Download PDF Now (50 pages)
Report Type Reports and Testimonies
Report Date April 21, 1982
Report No. EMD-82-39
Subject
Summary:

As required by the Energy Conservation and Production Act, GAO made its annual report on program effectiveness, energy savings, financial controls, and compliance monitoring of the State Energy Conservation Program in six states. The report, which covers fiscal year (FY) 1979, has been updated to include 1980 data. The Administration's FY 1983 budget proposes to dismantle the Department of Energy (DOE) and terminate the program.

The principle problems hampering program effectiveness were that the states: (1) undertook a large number of programs that accounted for minimal energy savings but a major share of the funds; (2) undertook programs in the buildings areas which used methods with serious limitations; (3) set overly optimistic goals as to the population that could be reached and the extent of compliance; and (4) did not know the program's effect on consumption because they failed to measure savings attributable only to the State Energy Conservation Program (SECP). However, the program has been effective in terms of developing a state capability to manage energy programs. Twenty-one percent of the programs accounted for the major share of planned energy savings in five states. Program measures aimed at then residential areas in four states placed primary emphasis on types of audit and media outreach efforts, which GAO previously reported as having serious limitations. Eight mandatory program measures were fully implemented in the six states reviewed. In general, GAO found that the savings goals were based on overly optimistic factors. Thus, savings reported for 1980 were significantly overstated and not a valid measure of program progress. Effective monitoring and assessment of the program continue to be hampered by deficiencies in financial, planning, and progress reporting systems.

« Return to search Government Accountability Office reports