CALIFORNIA REGULATORY NOTICE REGISTER 2016, VOLUME NO. 37-Z
 1629er written comments on the resulting regulation that are
received prior to adoption.
A V AILABILITY OF FINAL STATEMENT OF
REASONS
If the Board adopts the proposed amendments to Reg-
ulation 1 703, the Board will prepare a final statement of
reasons, which will be made available for inspection at
450 N Street, Sacramento, California, and available onthe Board’s Website at www .boe.ca.gov.
TITLE 20. CALIFORNIA ENERGY
COMMISSION
Computers, Computer Monitors, and Signage
Displays Appliance Efficiency Rulemaking
California Energy Commission
Docket No. 16−AAER−02
September 9, 2016
The California Energy Commission (Commission)
proposes to modify existing appliance efficiency regu-
lations to add requirements for computers and computer
monitors, clarify that signage displays are subject to the
previously adopted television standards, and add an ex-
emption to the battery charger systems standards clari-
fying that battery charger systems that are containedcompletely within a larger product and that provide
power for data storage or for continuity for volatile
cache or memory systems, help maintain system mem-
ory, and are not capable of powering full operation
when AC mains power is removed are not required to
comply with the regulations.
NOTICE THAT A PUBLIC HEARING
IS SCHEDULED
The date set for the adoption of regulations at a public
hearing is as follows:
Commission Business Meeting
November 9, 2016
10:00 a.m. (Pacific T ime)
California Energy Commission1516 9th Street
Sacramento, CA 95814
Rosenfeld Hearing Room(Wheelchair accessible)
Audio for the adoption hearing will be broadcast over
the internet. Details regarding the Commission’swebcast can be found at www .energy.ca.gov/webcast.If you have a disability and require assistance to par-
ticipate in these hearings, please contact Poneh Jones at
(916) 654−4425 at least 5 days in advance.
ORAL AND WRITTEN STATEMENTS
Interested persons may present oral and written state-
ments, arguments, or contentions regarding the pro-
posed regulations at the hearing, or may submit written
comments to the Commission for consideration on orprior to October 24, 2016. The Commission appreciates
receiving written comments at the earliest possible
date.
Additionally, the Commission will also hold a Lead
Commissioner Meeting on October 10, 2016, at 10:00a.m. in the Rosenfeld Hearing Room to receive oral
comments on the rulemaking.
Please submit comments to the Commission using
the Commission’s e−commenting feature by going tothe Commission’s 2016 Appliance Efficiency Rule-
making webpage http://www.energy.ca.gov/
appliances/2016−AAER−02/rulemaking/  and click on
the “Submit e−comment” link. A full name, e−mail ad-
dress, comment title, and either a comment or an at-
tached document (.doc, .docx, or .pdf format) is manda-
tory. After a challenge−response test used by the system
to ensure that responses are generated by a human user
and not a computer, click on the “Agree & Submit Your
Comment” button to submit the comment to the Com-mission’s Docket Unit.
Please note that written comments, attachments, and
associated contact information included within the
written comments and attachments, (e.g., your address,
phone, email, etc.) become part of the viewable public
record.
You are encouraged to use the electronic filing sys-
tem, described above, to submit comments. If you areunable to submit electronically, a paper copy of your
comments may be sent to:
Docket Unit
California Energy CommissionDocket No. 16−AAER−021516 9th Street, MS−4
Sacramento, CA 95814
Telephone: 916−654−5076Or e−mail them to: Docket@energy .ca.gov.
PUBLIC ADVISER
The Commission’s Public Adviser’s Office is avail-
able to assist any person who wishes to participate in
this proceeding. For assistance from the Public Advis-
er’s Office, please call (916) 654−4489 or toll−free inCalifornia at (800) 822−6228 or contactpublicadviser@energy.ca.gov
.CALIFORNIA REGULATORY NOTICE REGISTER 2016, VOLUME NO. 37-Z
 1630STATUTORY AUTHORITY AND REFERENCE —
Government Code Section 11346.5(a)(2) and 
1 California Code of Regulations 14
Authority: Sections 25213 and 25218(e), and
25402(c), Public Resources Code.
Reference: Sections 25216(d) and 25402(c), Public
Resources Code.
INFORMATIVE DIGEST/POLICY STATEMENT
OVERVIEW — Government Code Section
11346.5(a)(3)
Existing law requires the Commission to reduce the
inefficient consumption of energy and water by pre-
scribing efficiency standards and other cost−effectivemeasures for appliances that require a significantamount of energy and water to operate on a statewide
basis. Such standards must be technologically feasible
and attainable and must not result in any added total costto the consumer over the designed life of the appliance.
Existing law also requires the Commission, in deter-
mining cost−ef fectiveness, to consider the value of the
water or energy saved, the ef fect on product ef ficacy for
the consumer, and the life−cycle cost to the consumer of
complying with the standard. The Commission also
must consider other relevant factors including, but notlimited to, the effect on housing costs, the totalstatewide costs and benefits of the standard over the
lifetime of the standard, the economic effect on Califor-
nia businesses, and alternative approaches and the asso-
ciated costs.
The Appliance Efficiency Regulations (T itle 20, Sec-
tions 1601−1609 of the California Code of Regulations)
contain definitions, test procedures, labeling require-ments, and efficiency standards for state− and federal-
ly−regulated appliances. Appliance manufacturers are
required to certify to the Commission that their prod-ucts meet all applicable state and federal regulationspertaining to ef ficiency before their products can be in-
cluded in the Commission’s database of approved ap-
pliances to be sold or of fered for sale within California.
Appliance energy efficiency is identified as a key toachieving the greenhouse gas (GHG) emission reduc-
tion goals of Assembly Bill 32 (Nu
ñez, Chapter 488,
Statutes of 2006) (AB 32), as well as the recommenda-
tions contained in the California Air Resources Board’s
Climate Change Scoping Plan.
Energy efficiency regulations are also identified as
key components in reducing electrical energy con-sumption in the Commission’s 2013 Integrated Energy
Policy Report (IEPR) and the California Public Utilities
Commission’s (CPUC) 2011 update to its Energy Effi-
ciency Strategic Plan. Finally, Governor Brown identi-
fied reduced energy consumption through efficiencystandards as a key strategy for achieving his 2030 GHG
reduction goals.
The proposed regulations would expand the scope of
the appliance efficiency regulations to include comput-ers and computer monitors. The proposed regulationswould also establish appliance efficiency standards forcomputers and for computer monitors and define whattypes of appliances fall under the standards and whattypes do not. The proposed regulations would also es-tablish test methods for computers and computer m oni-
tors for the purpose of having a consistent and systemat-
ic approach for determining that computers and com-puter monitors being sold in California meet the appli-cable standard. The proposed regulations would alsoexempt small volume manufacturers that meet certain
criteria and are listed in the Commission’s Appliance
Efficiency Database from compliance with most of the
regulatory requirements, but would require them to en-
sure applicable products comply with power manage-ment setting requirements. Lastly, the proposed regula-
tions would require manufacturers to list computers and
computer monitors sold in California in the Commis-sion’s Appliance Ef ficiency Database.
Existing regulations establish appliance efficiency
standards for televisions. These regulations would clar-
ify that the television standards apply to signage dis-plays. The proposed regulations would also define“professional signage display” to differentiate it from
signage display and clarify that those appliances are not
subject to the television standards.
Existing regulations establish appliance efficiency
standards for battery charger systems. These regula-tions would exempt certain battery charger systems that
are contained completely within a larger product andthat provide power for data storage or for continuity for
volatile cache or memory systems, help maintain sys-tem memory, and are not capable of powering full oper-ation when AC mains power is removed. There is no test
procedure for these products, and thus, no ability todemonstrate compliance with the battery charger sys-tems standards. These products were not intended to be
included in the original battery charger systems rule-
making.
There are currently no existing comparable federal
regulations or statutes for computers, computer moni-tors, or signage displays. There are comparable federal
regulations and statutes applicable to battery chargersystems that will take effect June 13, 2018. These stan-
dards will preempt California’s standards at that time,so there would be no overlap in applicability betweenthe Commission’s battery charger systems regulationsand those of the United States Department of Energy(DOE). DOE has authority to adopt these requirements
under the Energy Policy and Conservation Act (EPCA)
42 USC 6295 et seq. There is not a substantial differ-CALIFORNIA REGULATORY NOTICE REGISTER 2016, VOLUME NO. 37-Z
 1631ence from these proposed regulations and DOE’s bat-
tery charger systems regulations.
The proposed regulations are not inconsistent or in-
compatible with existing state regulations. No otherstate regulations deal with appliance efficiency stan-dards. No standards for computers or computer moni-tors previously existed. Specifically adding the term“signage displays” to the television regulations clarifies
that the scope of that original rulemaking was intended
to include signage displays. Adding a certain type ofbattery charger system to the exemption list for thosestandards clarifies that those types of systems were not
intended to come under the scope of that rulemaking.These changes harmonize the regulations with the orig-
inal intent of the previous rulemakings.
The broad objectives of this rulemaking are to in-
crease energy efficiency savings in the state by estab-lishing energy efficiency standards for computers andcomputer monitors, appliances that are prevalent in the
state and for which cost−effective standards can be es-tablished.
In California, computers and computer monitors use
an estimated 5,610 gigawatt hours of electricity and ac-count for 1.7−2.9 percent of electricity consumption in
the residential sector and 7 percent of electricity con-sumption in the commercial sector, concentrated in of-
fices and educational facilities. More than 25.2 million
computer monitors are installed in residential and com-
mercial settings in California. Statewide, computer
monitors consume about 1527 gigawatt hours (GWh) of
electricity per year. Computer monitors contribute to a
peak demand of almost 206 megawatts (MW).
Available technologies and design methods can im-
prove the energy consumption of computers cost−effectively without a decrease in the product’ s function-
ality and performance, and some energy savings mightbe obtained through low−cost software improvementsthat use existing hardware more efficiently. Energyconsumption of computer monitors is directly related to
the brightness of the screen. As the brightness of the dis-play increases, it consumes more energy. User−con-trolled and automatic dimming techniques have the po-
tential to decrease energy consumption by decreasing
screen brightness. Automatic brightness control scalesscreen brightness to ambient lighting conditions, dim-ming the screen in low light conditions. Similar to auto-
matic brightness control, global dimming controls light
output based on image content; the backlight is turneddown for dark scenes and turned up for bright or whiteimages. Ev en without automatic control, screen bright-
ness can be manually controlled on most computermonitors using buttons on the display or a softwaremenu. The proposed regulations take advantage ofthese opportunities for ensuring energy ef ficiency gains
in computer monitors.The specific benefits anticipated by the proposed reg-
ulations include achieving energy efficiency gains with
regard to computers and computer monitors. Overall,these regulations help protect public health and safety
and the environment by saving approximately 1,636
gigawatt−hours per year from the computer standards,
calculated using the Energy Star dataset as a baseline,resulting in greenhouse gas emission reductions of
0.513 million metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent
per year and saving consumers about $262 million, us-ing the Energy Star dataset as a baseline, in electricitybills after the stock turnover. Regulating computer
monitors will save about 696 gigawatt hours per year
statewide, will result in greenhouse gas emission reduc-
tions of 0.218 million metric tons of carbon dioxide,
and will save about $111 million after existing stock is
replaced. These regulations combined will benefit busi-
nesses and consumers by reducing electricity bills by$373 million per year.
The specific benefits from adding the term signage
displays to the television standards is clarity in thescope of the regulations. The specific benefit from ex-empting a certain type of battery charger system from
the standards is clarity to the regulations that those types
of systems were not intended to fall within the scope ofthe regulations and are not required to comply.
DOCUMENTS INCORPORATED BY
REFERENCE — 1 California Code of Regulations
Section 20(c)(3)
The Commission proposes to incorporate the 15 doc-
uments listed below by reference. Pursuant to Califor-
nia Code of Regulations, title 1, section 20, all of these
documents are available for review at the Commission,
and are also available directly from the publishing enti-
ties. All available contact information, including inter-
net addresses, physical addresses, and phone numbers
for these entities has been provided where possible.Five of the listed documents are available for download
from the Commission’s website for this proceeding.
The other ten documents, however, are copyrighted andcopies cannot be provided directly by the Commissionwithout violating the documents’ terms of use The doc-
uments titled Advanced Configuration and Power In-
terface Specification Version 5.0 (Dec. 2011) and Erra-
ta A (Nov. 2013) are available for free from the Unified
Extensible Firmware Interface Forum’s website, listed
below. Documents from the Institute of Electrical andElectronics Engineers (IEEE) and the InternationalElectrotechnical Commission (IEC) are available elec-
tronically from these entities for a charge ranging from
approximately $130 to $815 per docu ment.
In this rulemaking, the affected public consists of
manufacturers of computers and computer monitorsCALIFORNIA REGULATORY NOTICE REGISTER 2016, VOLUME NO. 37-Z
 1632and test laboratories that are hired by these entities to
conduct the required testing. Manufacturers of comput-
ers would only need to purchase those documents thatapply to computers and manufacturers of computer
monitors would similarly only have to purchase the
documents related to computer monitors. Additionally,
many of these companies likely already have the re-quired documents, and if not, these documents would
only need to be purchased once no matter how many
models the manufacturers would be testing and certify-
ing to the Commission’s database. Therefore, the Com-mission has determined that the cost to obtain these doc-
uments is nominal for the entities that are subject to
these regulations. Because all of the documents will be
available for viewing at the Commission, copies of sev-
en of the documents may be obtained for free, and the
fee for obtaining copies of the remainder is a nominalone−time expense that can be easily absorbed by the en-
tities being regulated, the Commission concludes that
these documents ar e reasonably available to the affect-
ed public in conformance with California Code of Reg-ulations, title 1, section 20(c).
ADOBE SYSTEMS INCORPORATED
Adobe RGB (1998) Color Image Encoding Version
2005−05 (May 2005).
Copies available from:
Adobe Systems Incorporated
Corporate Headquarters345 Park A venue
San Jose, CA 951 10−2704
 (408) 536−6000
http://www.adobe.com
ECOV A
Generalized T est Pr otocol for Calculating the Energy
Efficiency of Internal Ac−Dc and Dc−Dc Power Sup-
plies Revision 6.7 (March 1, 2014)
Copies available from:
Plug Load Solutions by Ecovawww.plugloadsolutions.com
Phone: (971) 201−4180
INSTITUTE OF ELECTRICAL AND
 ELECTRONICS ENGINEERS (IEEE)
IEEE 802.3az−2010. IEEE Standar d for Information
technology—  Local and metr opolitan area networks —
Specific requirements — Part 3: CSMA/CD AccessMethod and Physical Layer Specifications Amendment
5: Media Access Control Parameters, Physical Layers,
and Management Parameters for Ener gy−Efficient
Ethernet
IEEE 802.3−2015. IEEE Standard for EthernetIEEE 802.11−2012. IEEE Standard for Wireless
LANs
Copies available from:
IEEE (T echStreet)
Publications Of fice
10662 Los Vaqueros Circle
 P .O. Box 3014Los Alamitos, CA 90720−1264
http://www.techstreet.com/ieee
http://standards.ieee.org
INTERNATIONAL EL ECTROTECHNICAL
 COMMISSION (IEC)
IEC 60297−3−101:2004. Mechanical structures for
electronic equipment — Dimensions of mechanical
structures of the 482.6 mm (19 in) series — Part 3−101:
Subracks and associated plug−in units
IEC 61966 2−1:1999. Multimedia systems and equip-
ment — Colour measurement and management. Part
2−1: Colour management — Default RGB colour space
— sRGB
IEC 62087: 2011. Methods of measurement for the
power consumption of audio, video and related equip-
ment
IEC 62301:20 11. Household electrical appliances —
Measurement of standby power
IEC 62623:2012. Desktop and notebook computers
— Measurement of energy consumption
Copies available from:
International Electrotechnical Commission
3, Rue de V arembé
P.O. Box 131 CH — 1211 Geneva 20
Switzerland
http://www.iec.ch
Phone: +41 22 919 02 11
Fax: +41 22 919 03 00
UNIFIED EXTENSIBLE FIRMWARE
INTERF ACE FORUM
Advanced Configuration and Power Interface Speci-
fication Revision 5.0 (December 6, 2011)
Advanced Configuration and Power Interface Speci-
fication Revision 5.0 Errata A (November 13, 2013).
Copies available from: 
UEFI Forum Administration3855 SW 153rd DriveBeaverton, OR 97003 USA
http://www.uefi.org
Phone: +1 503−619−0864
Fax: +1 503−644−6708
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
International Efficiency Marking Protocol for Exter-
nal Power Supplies Versi on 3.0 (September  2013).CALIFORNIA REGULATORY NOTICE REGISTER 2016, VOLUME NO. 37-Z
 1633Copies available from:
US DOE
1000 Independence A ve. SW
Washington DC 20585
202−586−5000
www.energy.gov
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY — ENERGY STAR
ENERGY STAR Program Requirements for Comput-
ers, subparts Eligibility Criteria Version 6.1 (Rev.
March−2016) and Final Test Method (Rev.
March−2016).
ENERGY STAR Pr ogram Requirements for Displays,
subpart Final Test Method (Rev. Sep−2015).
Copies available from:
US Environmental Protection Agency
Climate Protection Partnership
ENERGY STAR Programs Hotline & Distribution (MS−6202J)
1200 Pennsylvania Ave NW
Washington, DC 20460www.energystar.gov
LOCAL MANDATE DETERMINATION  —
Government Code Section 11346.5(a)(5)
The proposed regulations will not impose a mandate
on local agencies or school districts.
 HOUSING COSTS  — Government Code Section
11346.5(a)(12)
The proposed regulations would not have a signifi-
cant ef fect on housing costs.
FISCAL IMPACTS  — Government Code
Section 11346.5(a)(6)
Cost or Savings to Any State Agencies.  No public
agency would necessarily incur costs or savings in rea-
sonable compliance with these regulations. Any costsor savings to these entities would be as a result of the
regulations’ ef fect on the cost of purchasing appliances
affected by these regulations and the energy savingsthat result from operating appliances affected by theseregulations. The proposed regulations are estimated to
increase the purchase cost of computers and computer
monitors that a government entity needs. These incre-mental costs to purchases would most likely arise in fis-
cal year July 1, 2018−June 30, 2019 and the subsequentfive years. The incremental costs of the computers and
computer monitors are more than of fset by the resulting
energy savings in the form of reduced utility bills. Thepayback is estimated to be over two years, easily of fset-
ting the incremental cost. This fact is reflected in attach-
ment B where the annual net impact shows savings for
every year analyzed. The savings increase after the first
year as incremental costs are already paid for and sav-ings continue to be reaped. The incremental cost is esti-
mated to be $5 per computer monitor, $9.55 for Tier 1
and $14.00 for Tier 2 per desktop computer, $1.00 per
notebook, and $13 per small−scale server or worksta-tion computers with annual electricity savings of $4.43
per computer monitor, $4.86 for Tier 1 and $7.86 for
Tier 2 per desktop computer, $0.58 per notebook, $3.84
per small−scale server, and $5.98 per workstation com-puter. These incremental costs are not targeted specifi-cally at state or local governments, but rather morebroadly at what can generally be offered for sale to any
entity in California.
With regard to the cost to the Commission to imple-
ment, the regulations do not apply until 2019 and would
not have any potential for fiscal impact until then. Once
the regulations are in effect, the Commission is not ex-
pected to incur any additional enforcement or compli-ance costs as enforcement of appliance efficiency stan-
dards is self−funded through fines levied against enti-ties that violate the standards, pursuant to Public Re-
sources Code section 25402.1 1. Additionally, the Com-
mission expects to be able to shift currently available re-
sources to enforcement of these regulations, obviatingthe need to acquire any additional resources.
The clarification regarding signage displays is not ex-
pected to have any ef fect, as it just clarifies existing law.
The exemption added to the battery charger systemsstandards is not expected to result in any costs or sav-ings to state agencies.
Cost to Local Agencies or School Districts Requiring
Reimbursement.  As discussed above, no public agency
would necessarily incur any cost or savings in reason-able compliance with these regulations. As generallyapplicable requirements, the proposed regulations will
not impose on local agencies or school districts any
costs for which Government Code sections17500−17630 require reimbursement.
Other Nondiscretionary Cost or Savings Imposed
Upon Local Agencies.  As generally applicable require-
ments, the proposed regulations will not result in anyother nondiscretionary cost or savings to local agencies.
Cost or Savings in Federal Funding to the State.
 The
proposed regulations will not result in any cost or sav-
ings in federal funding to the state.CALIFORNIA REGULATORY NOTICE REGISTER 2016, VOLUME NO. 37-Z
 1634INITIAL DETERMINATION RE SIGNIFICANT
STATEWIDE ADVERSE ECONOMIC IMPACT
DIRECTLY AFFECTING BUSINESS, INCLUDING
ABILITY TO COMPETE — Government Code
Sections 11346.3(a), 11346.5(a)(7),
and 11346.5(a)(8)
The Commission has determined that the proposed
regulations will not have a significant, statewide ad-
verse economic impact directly affecting business, in-cluding the ability of California businesses to compete
with businesses in other states. This determination is
based upon evidence in the record, including the Stan-dardized Regulatory Impact Assessment  (SRIA) con-ducted for this proceeding.
STATEMENT OF THE RESULTS OF THE
STANDARDIZED REGULATORY IMPACT
ASSESSMENT — Government Code
Section 11346.5(a)(10)
Model results show that, relative to a baseline, the
Commission’s proposed standards would increasegross state product (GSP) by 0.014% in 2030 and create
slightly more than 12,000 jobs from 2018−2030. The
proposal is also expected to result in modest increases in
household income of 0.016% to 0.044%. Lower−income households that spend a higher proportion oftheir income on electricity are expected to benefit
slightly more than other household groups.
Creation Or Elimination Of Jobs Within California.
The proposed ef ficiency standards are expected to have
a moderate positive impact on overall job creation. Ap-
proximately 5,500 additional jobs are expected to be
created relative to the baseline in 2030. The cumulative
change over the analysis period, 2018− 2030, is expect-
ed to be slightly greater than 12,000 jobs created.
The proposal is not expected to result in the elimina-
tion of jobs in the economy. Expenditure shifting byhouseholds may result in some short term employment
adjustments, although the aggregate effect, as measured
by the model, is positive across sectors. Employmentgrowth in the electricity sector may be slighter lower
than in the baseline due to lower electricity demand.
Creation Of New Businesses Or Elimination Of Ex-
isting Businesses Within California.  In addition to the
direct net benefits that ener gy efficiency standards have
for California businesses, the proposal also improves
overall business activity in the state. The net savings are
redistributed as a general stimulus throughout the econ-
omy. The results suggest that the policy will have very
modest positive impact on aggregate business creation.
Lower electricity expenditures resulting from the ef-
ficiency standards are expected to have a modest ad-verse impact on the electricity sector. Sectoral resultsconfirm this, showing a less than 2% reduction in elec-
tric power sector output in 2030, relative to the baseline.
This result would be expected with any large−scale en-
ergy efficiency policy affecting the electric power sec-tor. The slower growth in the electric power sector ispartially muted by an overall increase in economic ac-tivity resulting from the policy; however, the net sec-
toral impact is still slightly negative. Nonetheless, there
is no expectation that this would eliminate businesses inCalifornia.
Competitive Advantages Or Disadvantages For
Businesses Currently Doing Business Within Califor-
nia. The regulation would apply to all businesses manu-
facturing the regulated products inside and outside of
the state, and selling computers and monitors to Califor-
nia customers. It is therefore not anticipated that theregulation will have an adverse effect on the competi-tiveness of California businesses. In fact, the BEARmodel results suggest that the macroeconomic stimulus
effect from the proposal will induce a modest increasein the state’ s aggregate export volume.
Increase Or Decrease Of Investment In California.
The economic assessment predicts a modest increase in
investment as a result of the proposed regulation. Thisresult is consistent with the expected increase in eco-nomic activity resulting from the large electricity sav-ings. Investment impact decreases over time as the in-
cremental net savings from the proposed standards lev-
el off. This is different than GSP and employment,which grows over time relative to the baseline, due toeconomy−wide multiplier ef fects.
Incentives For Innovation In Products, Materials, Or
Processes.  The proposed efficiency standards are by de-
sign meant to promote innovation for the regulated
product categories. While a number of technically fea-
sible compliance options are currently available, thestandards are also likely to incentivize manufacturers to
consider other lower cost options for delivering energy
efficiency benefits.
Due to the state’s large market share of regulated
products, there is the possibility that the Commission’s
proposed standards would compel manufacturers to in-
corporate the higher efficiency technologies into simi-lar products sold outside of the state. It is also possiblethat the state’s proposal could serve as a template forfederal computer ef ficiency standards.
Benefits Of The Regulations.
 The Commission’s
computer and computer monitor efficiency proposal is
expected to provide substantial energy savings to Cali-
fornia consumers. Net direct savings to individuals and
businesses in the state are expected to be approximately
$3.5 billion cumulatively from 2018 to 2030, or $350million per year once the product stock has fully turned
over.CALIFORNIA REGULATORY NOTICE REGISTER 2016, VOLUME NO. 37-Z
 1635The macroeconomic impact results show that, rela-
tive to the baseline, economic gr owth, employment, en-
terprise output, and investment all increase due to the
electricity savings associated with the proposed effi-
ciency standards. Employment and enterprise output
increase at a slightly faster rate than GSP due to the fact
that expenditure shifting occurs from relatively low em-
ployment electricity sectors to higher employment ser-
vice sectors. All macroeconomic effects are modest,
relative to the size of the California economy, which is
consistent with the magnitude of the stimulus generated
by the standards. The proposed standards are also ex-
pected to modestly reduce greenhouse gas and criteria
air pollutant emissions in the electric power sector.
The proposed computer standards will help protect
the health and welfare of California residents and the
state’s environment by saving about 1,636 gigawatt−
hours per year calculated using the Energy Start dataset
as a baseline, resulting in greenhouse gas emission re-
ductions of 0.513 million metric tons of carbon dioxide
equivalent per year and will save consumers about $262
million in electricity bills after the stock turnover. Reg-
ulating computer monitors will save about 696
gigawatt−hours per year statewide, will result in green-
house gas emission reductions of 0.218 million metric
ton of carbon dioxide equivalent, and will save about
$111 million after existing stock is replaced.
Summary Of Comments Submitted By Department of
Finance And Responses To  Those Comments.
Comment #1: The required discussion of the baseline
is incomplete without specifying how many units will
be sold that would meet the efficiency standards even
without the proposed regulations.
Response: The average energy savings presented in
Chapter 2 of the SRIA account for the fact that a number
of computers are naturally complying with the pro-
posed standards and therefore do not contribute to the
energy savings. However, the Commission agrees that
this is not clearly stated in the SRIA and has revised
Chapter 2 to explain the calculations more clearly. The
Commission also adjusted the total direct compliance
costs in the final staff report to account for already−
compliant products. This adjustment is not reflected in
the SRIA, as it is within the range of alternatives analy-
sis. More details can be found in the final staff report
that is expected to be published in September and will
be available on the Commission’s website.
Comment #2: The discussion of impacts must include
how users might respond to changes in their computer
equipment, and how the regulation will be enforced.
The analysis must specify whether the enforcement
costs of verifying if manufacturers and retailers are im-
plementing the new regulation are included, and if not
included, must include a discussion of such costs.Response: The Commission diligently reviewed
many studies but couldn’t find any information to deter-
mine conclusively how a user would respond tochanges in computer equipment. Currently, we areworking with the California Plug−Load Research Cen-
ter at the University of California at Irvine, where theyare conducting research studies on the user’s behavior
with regard to a computer’s energy−saving settings.
The Commission revised its SRIA in Chapter 3 to clari-
fy assumptions made regarding user behavior.
The Commission has reviewed a few studies on com-
pliance with efficiency standards, but these studies donot provide conclusive information about the compli-ance rate once the regulations are in effect. The Com-
mission revised Chapter 3 of its SRIA to clarify that the
energy−savings numbers assume 100 percent compli-
ance.
The Commission is not expected to incur any addi-
tional enforcement or compliance costs, as enforcement
of appliance efficiency standards is self−fundedthrough fines levied against entities that violate the
standards. The Commission revised its SRIA in Chap-
ter 5 to clarify this point.
Comment #3: There may also be particular impacts
on certain groups. Older individuals are more likely touse desktop computers (which have larger cost increas-es under the proposed regulations), as do low−income
households who prioritize cost over convenience in
computer usage. While the lifetime energy savings fordesktops and monitors more than compensate for the in-
creased up−front costs, the up−front costs may present a
burden for low−income and elderly households. Theexemption of small manufacturers from the regulationcould give them an advantage versus larger manufac-
turers. These impacts should be discussed to the extent
possible.
Response: The Commission acknowledges that the
proposed regulations will likely affect the purchaseprice of regulated computers and computer monitors,including those in lower price range. The Commissionstaff conducted research to analyze the effect of the reg-
ulation on specified groups, which is included in chap-
ter 3 of the SRIA. The Commission did not find infor-mation to suggest how older or low−income individuals
make purchase decisions differently than other groups.All consumers ultimately benefit from the proposedregulations and the market is expected to naturally ad-
just to offer low cost products catered to the aforemen-
tioned groups. Furthermore, the estimated incrementalcost is based on today’s cost and by the time the regula-
tions take ef fect, the costs are expected to be lower.
With regard to small manufacturers, the proposed ef-
ficiency regulations present both an advantage and adisadvantage. On the one hand, small manufacturers areCALIFORNIA REGULATORY NOTICE REGISTER 2016, VOLUME NO. 37-Z
 1636(partially) exempt from the standards. On the other
hand, small manufacturers are unable to achieve
economies of scale compared to the larger manufactur-
ers. Moreover, small manufacturers usually tar get a dif-
ferent group of customers than larger manufacturers by
offering highly customized computers, and therefore,small manufacturers are not in direct competition withlarger manufacturers. Finally, the exemption for small
manufacturers only applies up to a specified number of
units. If the manufacturer makes more than that number
of units, those units must comply with the efficiencystandards.
The analysis did not change significantly due to De-
partment of Finance’s comments. To help clarify thecalculations for the average energy savings, an example
was added comparing absolute energy savings to the en-
ergy savings when adjusted for the products that arecompliant with the proposed standards without the reg-
ulations. A discussion was also added indicating that
the analysis assumes that users do not change the power
management setting on regulated products and that ac-
tual energy savings may be dif ferent if users change the
default power management settings.
It was also clarified that the compliance rate was as-
sumed to be 100 percent for the purpose of this econom-
ic analysis, whereas other appliance regulations typi-cally have a 60 to 90 percent compliance rate. And the
discussion regarding cost to the Commission to enforce
these new standards was clarified to explain that costswould be negligible as current resources used to enforce
other appliances are expected to be shifted to enforce-
ment of these standards.
COST IMPACTS ON REPRESENTATIVE PERSON
OR BUSINESS — Government Code
Section 11346.5(a)(9)
A representative business would incur approximately
$600 in costs per basic model associated with ensuring
each of their products complies with these regulations.
These costs would include testing their product to en-
sure it meets the applicable standard and certifying inour database the performance characteristics of theirproduct. No cost impacts are expected from the signage
displays clarification or the battery charger systems ex-
emption.
BUSINESS REPORT  — Government Code
Sections 11346.5(a)(11) and 11346.3(d)
The proposed regulations impose new data reporting
requirements on manufacturers for computers and com-
puter monitors. The cost of certification has recentlybeen reduced through improvements to the certificationprocess and new streamlined database. An estimated
$1,000 per year per manufacturer is expected for data
reporting purposes. This equates to 2 staff−days fromeach manufacturer at a cost of $500 per staf f−day. The
cost is expected to be annual as computer manufactur-
ers and computer monitor manufacturers typically re-design their products each year, thereby triggering theneed for data submittal. Signage displays are already re-
quired to be certified to existing standards previously
adopted by the Commission. No new reports would be
required from the battery charger exemption change.
It is necessary for the health, safety, or welfare of the
people of the state that these regulations apply to busi-
nesses. As discussed above, improving energy ef ficien-
cy of appliances sold in California is an important state
goal with public health and safety and environmental
benefits.
SMALL BUSINESS IMPACTS —
1 California Code
of Regulations Section 4(a) and (b)
The Commission has determined that these regula-
tions will affect small business. These regulations
would affect businesses, including those independently
owned and operated and not dominant in their field ofoperation, involved in manufacturing computers and
computer monitors, as well as businesses involved in
retail and wholesale trade. While some of the affectedsmall businesses will be exempted from the bulk of the
new regulations through the small volume manufactur-
er exemption, they would still be subject to power man-
agement requirements for applicable products. Thus,small businesses would be legally required to complywith the regulations.
Additionally, small businesses would derive a benefit
from the enforcement of these regulations. Small busi-nesses, like other businesses that use computers andcomputer monitors, are expected to benefit from the an-
ticipated electricity savings resulting from the ef ficien-
cy standards. Like other business enterprises, smallbusinesses will also incur an additional cost when pur-
chasing products covered under the standards. The net
effect is expected to be an overall savings in electricityspending.
Small businesses are not expected to be affected by
the signage display clarification, as it reflects existing
law. Small businesses may benefit from the batterycharger systems exemption, as manufacturers of theparticular products exempted would not be required to
comply with the battery char ger systems requirements.
ALTERNATIVE STATEMENT  — Government Code
Section 11346.5(a)(13)
The Commission must determine that no reasonable
alternative cons idered by the agency, or that has other-CALIFORNIA REGULATORY NOTICE REGISTER 2016, VOLUME NO. 37-Z
 1637wise been identified and brought to the attention of the
agency, would be more ef fective in carrying out the pur-
pose for which the action is proposed, would be as ef-fective and less burdensome to affected private persons
than the proposed action, or would be more cost−
effective to affected private persons and equally effec-tive in implementing the statutory policy or other provi-
sion of law.
CONTACT PERSON — Government Code
Section 11346.5(a)(14)
Inquiries concerning the proposed regulations should
be directed to Harinder Singh atHarinder.Singh@energy.ca.gov
 or (916) 654−4091 for
computer monitors, signage displays, and battery
chargers, and to Soheila Pasha atSoheila.Pasha@energy.ca.gov
 or (916) 657−1002 for
computers. The designated backup contact person is
Kenneth Rider, who can be reached atKen.Rider@energy.ca.gov
 or (916) 654−5006.
COPIES OF THE INITIAL STATEMENT OF
REASONS AND EXPRESS TERMS —Government
Code Section 11346.5(a)(16)
The Commission has prepared an initial statement of
reasons for the proposed regulations, has available allthe information upon which this proposal is based, and
has available the express terms of the proposed action.
To obtain a copy of any of this information, please visitthe Commission’s website at https://efiling.energy.
ca.gov/Lists/DocketLog.aspx?docketnumber=16−
AAER−02  or contact Angelica Romo−Ramos at
Angelica.Romo@energy.ca.gov  or (916) 654−4147.
Additionally, all of the documents incorporated by ref-
erence are available for viewing at the Commission at
1516 Ninth Street, Sacramento, California 95814.
A V AILABILITY OF SUBSTANTIAL CHANGES
TO ORIGINAL PROPOSAL FOR AT LEAST 15
DAYS PRIOR TO AGENCY
ADOPTION/REPEAL/AMENDMENT OF
RESULTING REGULATIONS — Government Code
Section 11346.5(a)(18)
Participants should be aware that any of the proposed
regulations could be substantively changed as a resultof public comment, staff recommendation, or recom-mendations from Commissioners. Moreover, changes
to the proposed regulations not indicated in the express
terms could be considered if they improve the clarity or
effectiveness of the regulations. If the Commissionconsiders changes to the proposed regulations pursuantto Government Code section 11346.8, a full copy of the
text will be available for review at least 15 days prior to
the date on which the Commission adopts or amends theresulting regulations.
COPY OF THE FINAL STATEMENT OF
REASONS — Government Code
Section 11346.5(a)(19)
At the conclusion of the rulemaking, persons may ob-
tain a copy of the final statement of reasons once it has
been prepared by visiting the Commission’s website at:
https://efiling.energy.ca.gov/Lists/DocketLog.
aspx?docketnumber=16−AAER−02 or by contacting
Angelica Romo−Ramos at Angelica.Romo@energy.
ca.gov or (916) 654−4147.
INTERNET ACCESS  — Government Code Sections
11346.4(a)(6) and 11346.5(a)(20)
The Commission maintains a website in order to fa-
cilitate public access to documents prepared and con-
sidered as part of this rulemaking proceeding. Docu-
ments prepared by the Commission for this rulemaking,
including this Notice of Proposed Action, the Express
Terms, the Initial Statement of Reasons, the Economic
and Fiscal Impact Statements, and the StandardizedRegulatory Impact Assessment, as well as many otherdocuments in the rulemaking file, have been posted at:
https://efiling.energy.ca.gov/Lists/DocketLog.
aspx?docketnumber=16−AAER−02.
NEWS MEDIA INQUIRIES
News media inquiries should be directed to Media
and Public Communications Office at (916) 654−4989,
or by e−mail at mediaof fice@energy.ca.gov .
GENERAL PUBLIC INTEREST
CALIFORNIA BUREAU OF REAL
ESTATE
NOTICE OF MODIFIED TEXT FOR CRITERIA
FOR REHABILITIATION — SECS.2911 AND 2912
ORIGINAL PUBLICATION ON
OCTOBER 30, 2015
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN
The Commissioner (“Commissioner”) of the Bureau
of Real Estate (“CalBRE”) proposes to amend Sections