A dispute has recently emerged in the North American lighting sector, as the National Association of Independent Lighting Distributors (NAILD) has openly challenged the DesignLights Consortium (DLC), claiming its influence has harmed the industry. DLC, in turn, has responded to what it calls misrepresentations and inaccuracies.
The 'call out' by NAILD
NAILD member, part-time NAILD manager and host of the Get a Grip on Lighting podcast Michael Colligan spoke with us at length about what he sees as structural problems in the DLC model. His delivery was impassioned, painting the DLC as disproportionately powerful in comparison to other industry organizations. According to Michael, while NAILD generates around $200,000 in annual revenue, the DLC operates on roughly $10 million, "absorbing more non-profit revenue in lighting than all the other lighting industry non-profits, including IES, combined."
Michael argued that most lighting associations function on voluntary contributions, while the DLC operates "coercively" by tying certification to access to the utility rebate market, which he described as the largest in North America. He claimed that exclusion from DLC's Qualified Products List (QPL) effectively means financial ruin for manufacturers, as more than 700 utilities use the QPL as a requirement.
He also questioned the value of DLC certification itself, calling lumens per watt, the metric underpinning rebate eligibility, "illusory," and contending that it has led to unintended consequences such as light pollution, the collapse of major Western lighting brands, and the transfer of technical know-how to China. "We exchanged manufacturing capacity for lumens per watt," Michael said, framing the standard as environmentally and economically counterproductive.
Michael further alleged that NAILD's stakeholder feedback to DLC has been ignored. He cited a 15-point report sent in 2023 outlining concerns, which he said was not meaningfully addressed. "They talk about transparency, collaboration, and impact, but when we gave them detailed feedback, the response was silence," he said.
© Negotin8 | Dreamstime
DLC's response
DLC provided a written statement rejecting these claims, calling them "hyperbole and falsehoods" that distract from genuine industry challenges. "DLC engages regularly and openly with stakeholders through advisory committees, public comment periods, and direct outreach," said director Tina Halfberry. She added that the DLC attempted to get in contact with NAILD's president after receiving his letters, but they were told to communicate only through Michael, who they don't name personally but call 'NAILD's podcast producer', a response the organization found "illogical and insincere." Tina positioned DLC's role in a broader historical context, noting the "extraordinary progress" of the past two decades, including LED adoption, reduced mercury use, and lower greenhouse gas emissions. The QPLs, she said, represent "minimum thresholds, not ceilings," ensuring reliability while leaving room for innovation. By consolidating performance validation, DLC argues, the QPL provides a crucial gateway to rebate programs while safeguarding ratepayer trust.
A clash of perspectives
At stake are questions about how standards are set, how market access is determined, and how innovation is balanced with accountability. For now, NAILD continues to push for what it describes as greater transparency and fairness, while DLC maintains its commitment to guidelines which, according to them, have pushed the lighting sector forward.
