September 24, 2025

5 Big Questions: Understanding NAILD’s Concerns About DLC

Matt Honson and Devin Wall discuss NAILD’s open letter outlining concerns about DLC's role in the lighting industry

In this interview, Matt Honson, President of the National Association of Innovative Lighting Distributors (NAILD), and Devin Wall, Chair of NAILD’s DLC Committee, explain the motivations behind their open letter urging the DesignLights Consortium (DLC) to phase out its certification programs by 2030. The letter, sent in September 2025, accuses DLC of ignoring stakeholder input, contributing to lighting-related e-waste, and creating a pay-to-play system that distorts rebate access. Honson and Wall argue for an industry-led alternative, citing quality concerns and a disconnect between DLC’s structure and the needs of lighting professionals.

The DLC maintains that it is not a regulator or industry gatekeeper, but rather a standards body that develops voluntary, consensus-based tools. Its Qualified Products Lists and technical specifications are designed to provide consistency and transparency for rebate programs and buyers, while leaving adoption decisions to utilities, distributors, and other market participants. Full DLC Statement »

On September 10, Inside Lighting invited DLC CEO Tina Halfpenny to participate in a video interview, an invitation that remains open.

Hear it straight from Matt Honson and Devin Wall of NAILD:

Why did NAILD decide to write this letter now, and what makes DLC such a high-priority issue for the organization compared to other possible initiatives? (1:24)
What prompted NAILD to use such sharp language, calling DLC a “nightmare circus” and accusing it of “feeding off” the industry, instead of a more diplomatic tone? (2:44)
If DLC exited the industry, what alternative mechanism could ensure rebate integrity and prevent fraud in the absence of a centralized product certification? (7:24)
Does NAILD believe DLC ignores all stakeholder feedback, or is the issue more about NAILD’s specific input not being adopted? (9:21)
Is the presence of low-quality DLC-certified products necessarily proof that the certification process drives bad design, or simply an example of market dynamics? (13:59)
BONUS QUESTION: Is there a version of DLC that NAILD could live with — or even collaborate with — if the approach were fundamentally different? (18:40)