Vol. 79 Thursday, 

No. 99 May 22, 2014 

Part V 

Department of Energy 

10 CFR Parts 429 and 431 

Energy Conservation Program: Test Procedures for High-Intensity 

Discharge Lamps; Proposed Rule 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS3

29632 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 99 / Thursday, May 22, 2014 / Proposed Rules 

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY 

10 CFR Parts 429 and 431 

[Docket No. EERE–2010–BT–TP–0044] 

RIN 1904–AC37 

Energy Conservation Program: Test 

Procedures for High-Intensity 

Discharge Lamps 

AGENCY: Office of Energy Efficiency and 

Renewable Energy, Department of 

Energy. 

ACTION: Supplemental notice of 

proposed rulemaking. 

SUMMARY: On December 15, 2011, the 

U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) issued 

a notice of proposed rulemaking (NOPR) 

to establish test procedures (TP) for 

high-intensity discharge (HID) lamps 

(herein referred to as the December 2011 

TP NOPR). In this supplemental notice 

of proposed rulemaking (SNOPR), DOE 

updates the industry standards 

proposed to be incorporated by 

reference in the December 2011 TP 

NOPR and proposes to revise or 

eliminate certain definitions relevant to 

HID lamps. DOE also provides 

clarification and additional background 

information on ambient temperature 

conditions, and revises proposed 

ambient air speed requirements. DOE 

revises its proposed sampling plan as 

well. In addition, DOE removes the 

directional lamp requirements and 

proposed lumen maintenance test 

method included in the December 2011 

TP NOPR. The other provisions of the 

December 2011 TP NOPR are unaffected 

by this SNOPR. 

DATES: DOE will accept comments, data, 

and information regarding this SNOPR 

submitted no later than June 23, 2014. 

See section IV, ‘‘Public Participation,’’ 

for details. 

ADDRESSES: Any comments submitted 

must identify the SNOPR for test 

procedures for high-intensity discharge 

lamps and provide docket number 

EERE–2010–BT–TP–0044 and/or 

regulatory information number (RIN) 

1904–AC37. Comments may be 

submitted using any of the following 

methods: 

1. Federal eRulemaking Portal: 

www.regulations.gov. Follow the 

instructions for submitting comments. 

2. Email: HIDLamps-2010-TP-0044@

ee.doe.gov. Include the docket number 

(EERE–2010–BT–TP–0044) and/or RIN 

(1904–AC37) in the subject line of the 

message. Submit electronic comments 

in WordPerfect, Microsoft Word, PDF, 

or ASCII file format, and avoid the use 

of special characters or any form of 

encryption. 

3. Postal Mail: Ms. Brenda Edwards, 

U.S. Department of Energy, Building 

Technologies Office, Mailstop EE–5B, 

1000 Independence Avenue SW., 

Washington, DC 20585–0121. If 

possible, please submit all items on a 

compact disk CD, in which case it is not 

necessary to include printed copies. 

4. Hand Delivery/Courier: Ms. Brenda 

Edwards, U.S. Department of Energy, 

Building Technologies Office, 950 

L’Enfant Plaza SW., Suite 600, 

Washington, DC 20024. Phone: (202) 

586–2945. If possible, please submit all 

items on a CD, in which case it is not 

necessary to include printed copies. 

Docket: The docket, which includes 

Federal Register notices, public meeting 

attendee lists and transcripts, 

comments, and other supporting 

documents/materials, is available for 

review at regulations.gov. All 

documents in the docket are listed in 

the regulations.gov index. However, not 

all documents listed in the index may 

be publicly available, such as 

information that is exempt from public 

disclosure. 

Instructions: All submissions received 

must include the agency name and 

docket number and/or RIN for this 

rulemaking. No facsimiles (faxes) will 

be accepted. 

A link to the docket Web page can be 

found at: www1.eere.energy.gov/

buildings/appliance_standards/

rulemaking.aspx/ruleid/21. This Web 

page contains a link to the docket for 

this notice on the www.regulations.gov 

site. The www.regulations.gov Web page 

will contain instructions on how to 

access all documents, including public 

comments, in the docket. See section IV 

for information on how to submit 

comments through 

www.regulations.gov. 

For further information on how to 

submit a comment and review other 

public comments, contact Ms. Brenda 

Edwards at (202) 586–2945 or by email: 

Brenda.Edwards@ee.doe.gov. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Ms. Lucy deButts, U.S. Department of 

Energy, Office of Energy Efficiency 

and Renewable Energy, Building 

Technologies Office, EE–5B, 1000 

Independence Avenue SW., 

Washington, DC 20585–0121. 

Telephone: (202) 287–1604. Email: 

high_intensity_dischage_lamps@

ee.doe.gov. 

Ms. Johanna Hariharan, U.S. 

Department of Energy, Office of the 

General Counsel, GC–71, 1000 

Independence Avenue SW., 

Washington DC 20585–0121. 

Telephone: (202) 287–6307. Email: 

Johanna.Hariharan@hq.doe.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Table of Contents 

I. Authority and Background 

II. Discussion of the Supplemental Notice of 

Proposed Rulemaking 

A. Industry Standards and Test Procedures 

B. Definitions 

1. Definitions Relevant to High-Intensity 

Discharge Lamps 

a. Beam Angle 

b. Color Rendering Index 

c. Correlated Color Temperature 

d. Directional Lamp 

e. Initial Lumen Output 

f. High-Pressure Sodium Lamp 

g. Lamp Efficacy 

h. Lamp Electrical Power Input 

i. Lamp Wattage 

j. Lumen Maintenance 

k. Rated Luminous Flux or Rated Lumen 

Output 

l. Self-Ballasted Lamp 

2. Definition of ‘‘Ballast Efficiency’’ for 

Metal Halide Lamp Fixtures 

3. Definition of ‘‘Basic Model’’ for HighIntensity Discharge Lamps 

C. Test Procedures for Measuring Energy 

Efficiency of High-Intensity Discharge 

Lamps 

1. Test Setup and Conditions 

a. Ambient Conditions 

i. Ambient Test Temperature 

ii. Air Speed 

b. Power Supply Characteristics 

c. Reference Ballasts 

i. Lamps for Electronic Ballasts Only 

ii. Self-Ballasted Lamps and Reference 

Ballasts 

iii. Reference Ballasts for Multi-Start Type 

Metal Halide Lamps 

iv. Lamp Orientation and Reference 

Ballasts 

d. Instrumentation 

i. Integrating Sphere 

ii. Goniophotometer 

2. Lamp Selection and Setup 

a. Basic Model 

b. Sampling Plans 

i. Sample Size 

ii. Statistical Representation 

iii. Divisor 

iv. Proposed Sampling Plan for Potential 

Energy Conservation Standards 

c. Lamp Seasoning and Stabilization 

d. Lamp/Circuit Transfer 

e. Lamp Orientation 

3. Special Considerations for Directional 

Lamps 

D. Test Measurements and Calculations 

1. Measurement and Calculation of Efficacy 

2. Measurement and Calculation of Center 

Beam Intensity and Beam Angle 

3. Measurement and Calculation of 

Correlated Color Temperature and Color 

Rendering Index 

i. Correlated Color Temperature 

ii. Color Rendering Index 

4. Test Method for Measuring Lumen 

Maintenance 

E. Active Modes—Less Than Full Output 

(Dimming) 

1. Measurement of Dimming Performance 

for Potential Energy Conservation 

Standards 

F. Standby Mode and Off Mode Energy 

Usage 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS3

Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 99 / Thursday, May 22, 2014 / Proposed Rules 29633 

1All references to EPCA in this document refer 

to the statute as amended through the American 

Energy Manufacturing Technical Corrections Act 

(AEMTCA), Public Law 112–210 (Dec. 18, 2012). 

2For editorial reasons, Parts B and C were redesignated as Parts A and A–1 on codification in 

the U.S. Code. 

G. Laboratory Accreditation Program 

H. Effective Date and Compliance Date for 

the Test Procedures and Compliance 

Date for Submitting High-Intensity 

Discharge Lamp Certification Reports 

1. Effective Date for the Test Procedures 

2. Compliance Date for the Test Procedures 

3. Compliance Date for Submitting HighIntensity Discharge Lamp Certification 

Reports 

III. Procedural Issues and Regulatory Review 

A. Review Under Executive Order 12866 

B. Review Under the Regulatory Flexibility 

Act 

1. Estimated Small Business Burden 

C. Review Under the Paperwork Reduction 

Act of 1995 

D. Review Under the National 

Environmental Policy Act of 1969 

E. Review Under Executive Order 13132 

F. Review Under Executive Order 12988 

G. Review Under the Unfunded Mandates 

Reform Act of 1995 

H. Review Under the Treasury and General 

Government Appropriations Act, 1999 

I. Review Under Executive Order 12630 

J. Review Under the Treasury and General 

Government Appropriations Act, 2001 

K. Review Under Executive Order 13211 

L. Review Under Section 32 of the Federal 

Energy Administration Act of 1974 

IV. Public Participation 

A. Submission of Comments 

B. Issues on Which DOE Seeks Comment 

1. Definitions 

a. Beam Angle 

b. Color Rendering Index 

c. Correlated Color Temperature 

d. Directional Lamp 

e. High-Pressure Sodium Lamp 

f. Initial Lumen Output 

g. Lamp Efficacy 

h. Lamp Electrical Power Input 

i. Lamp Wattage 

j. Lumen Maintenance 

k. Mercury Vapor Lamp 

l. Metal Halide Lamp 

m. Rated Luminous Flux or Lumen Output 

n. Self-Ballasted Lamp 

o. Ballast Efficiency 

p. Basic Model 

2. Ambient Test Temperature 

3. Air Speed 

4. Reference Ballasts 

5. Instrumentation for Photometric 

Measurement 

6. Sampling Plan 

7. Lamp Seasoning and Stabilization 

8. Cool-Down and Re-Stabilization 

9. Lamp Orientation 

10. Special Consideration for Directional 

Lamps 

11. Efficacy 

12. Measurement and Calculation of 

Correlated Color Temperature and Color 

Rendering Index 

13. Dimming 

14. Small Business Burden 

V. Approval of the Office of the Secretary 

I. Authority and Background 

Title III, Part B of the Energy Policy 

and Conservation Act of 1975 (Pub. L. 

94–163, 42 U.S.C. 6291, et seq. ‘‘EPCA’’ 

or ‘‘the Act’’) sets forth a variety of 

provisions designed to improve energy 

efficiency and established the Energy 

Conservation Program for Consumer 

Products Other Than Automobiles.1 Part 

C of title III, ‘‘Certain Industrial 

Equipment’’ (42 U.S.C. 6311–6317), 

establishes an energy conservation 

program for such equipment.2 Although 

HID lamps are defined in 42 U.S.C. 

6291(46), DOE is required to set 

standards for HID lamps in 42 U.S.C. 

6317(a)(1). Therefore, DOE has 

determined that the provisions of Part C 

are applicable to HID lamps. 

Under EPCA, the energy conservation 

program consists essentially of four 

parts: (1) Testing, (2) labeling, (3) 

Federal energy conservation standards, 

and (4) certification and enforcement 

procedures. The testing requirements 

consist of test procedures that 

manufacturers of covered products must 

use as the basis for (1) certifying to DOE 

that their products comply with the 

applicable energy conservation 

standards adopted under EPCA (42 

U.S.C. 6295(s) and 6316(a)), and (2) 

making representations about the 

efficiency of those products (42 U.S.C. 

6315(b)). Similarly, DOE must use these 

test procedures to determine whether 

the products comply with any relevant 

standards promulgated under EPCA (42 

U.S.C. 6295(s) and 6316(a)(1)). 

EPCA requires DOE to prescribe 

testing requirements for HID lamps 

within 30 months after issuance of a 

positive determination that energy 

conservation standards are 

technologically feasible and 

economically justified, and would result 

in significant energy savings. (42 U.S.C. 

6317(a)(1)) DOE published a positive 

final determination for HID lamps on 

July 1, 2010. 75 FR 37975. 

General Test Procedures Rulemaking 

Process 

Under 42 U.S.C. 6314, EPCA sets forth 

the criteria and procedures DOE must 

follow when prescribing or amending 

test procedures for covered equipment. 

EPCA provides in relevant part that any 

test procedures prescribed or amended 

under this section shall be reasonably 

designed to produce test results that 

measure energy efficiency, energy use, 

or estimated annual operating cost of a 

covered product or equipment during a 

representative average use cycle or 

period of use, as determined by the 

Secretary of Energy, and shall not be 

unduly burdensome to conduct. (42 

U.S.C. 6314(a)(2)) 

Background 

DOE published a NOPR on December 

15, 2011 (herein referred to as the 

December 2011 TP NOPR) proposing 

test procedures for HID lamps to 

measure efficacy, color characteristics, 

and lumen maintenance. 76 FR 77914. 

DOE presented the December 2011 TP 

NOPR at a public meeting on January 

19, 2012 (herein referred to as the 

January 2012 TP public meeting). 

Comments received in response to the 

December 2011 TP NOPR and a 

transcript of the public meeting are 

available at www.regulations.gov. DOE 

received comments from interested 

parties suggesting that the DOE HID 

lamps test procedures should be aligned 

with similar international standards and 

test procedures, and that DOE should 

pursue using test data already collected 

in accordance with international 

requirements. DOE also received 

comments on its proposals to measure 

lamp color characteristics, lumen 

maintenance, and directional lamp 

characteristics. Other comments were 

received on the proposed sampling 

plan, laboratory accreditation 

requirements, and the instrumentation 

requirements for test apparatuses. 

Based on comments received on the 

December 2011 TP NOPR, and 

subsequent additional research, DOE 

proposes to revise and clarify the 

proposed HID lamp test procedures. In 

this SNOPR, DOE provides interested 

parties with an opportunity to comment 

on these revised and new proposals, 

described in section II. 

II. Discussion of the Supplemental 

Notice of Proposed Rulemaking 

In this SNOPR, DOE updates the 

industry standards proposed to be 

incorporated by reference in the 

December 2011 TP NOPR and proposes 

revisions to three elements of the 

December 2011 TP NOPR: (1) 

Definitions; (2) ambient testing 

conditions for temperature and air 

speed; and (3) sampling plan. These 

revisions address comments from 

interested parties and incorporate recent 

research on HID lamps. This SNOPR 

also removes the directional lamp and 

lumen maintenance testing 

requirements included in the December 

2011 TP NOPR. 

In this SNOPR, DOE revises the 

December 2011 TP NOPR proposed 

definitions relevant to HID lamps in 10 

CFR part 431 for ‘‘basic model,’’ 

‘‘directional lamp,’’ ‘‘lamp efficacy,’’ 

and ‘‘lamp wattage,’’ and proposes to 

eliminate the terms ‘‘beam angle,’’ 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS3

29634 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 99 / Thursday, May 22, 2014 / Proposed Rules 

3A notation in the form ‘‘Intertek, Public Meeting 

Transcript, No. 5 at p. 121’’ identifies a comment 

that DOE has received during a public meeting and 

has included in the docket of this rulemaking. This 

particular notation refers to a comment: (1) 

Submitted by Intertek; (2) transcribed from the 

public meeting in document number 5 of the 

docket, and (3) appearing on page 121 of that 

document. 

4A notation in the form ‘‘NEMA, No. 6 at p. 8’’ 

identifies a written comment that DOE has received 

and included in the docket of this rulemaking. This 

particular notation refers to a comment: (1) 

Submitted by National Electric Manufacturer’s 

Association; (2) in document number 6 of the 

docket; and (3) on page 8 of that document. 

5A notation in this form provides a reference for 

information that is in the docket of DOE’s ‘‘Energy 

Conservation Program for Certain Commercial and 

Industrial Equipment: Energy Conservation 

Standards for High-Intensity Discharge Lamps’’ 

(Docket No. EERE–2010–BT–STD–0043), which is 

maintained at www.regulations.gov. This notation 

indicates that the statement preceding the reference 

is document number 00023 in the docket for the 

metal halide lamp ballasts test procedures 

rulemaking, and appears at page 18 of that 

document. 

‘‘lamp electrical power input,’’ and 

‘‘lumen maintenance.’’ DOE also 

proposes to add a definition for ‘‘initial 

lumen output.’’ DOE also clarifies the 

proposed requirements for ambient 

temperature conditions and provides 

additional background information in 

support of these requirements. In 

addition, DOE revises its proposed 

ambient air speed requirements to 

eliminate as unwarranted an explicit air 

speed limit. Finally, DOE revises its 

sampling plan requirements for sample 

size and statistical representation. 

A. Industry Standards and Test 

Procedures 

In the December 2011 TP NOPR, DOE 

proposed to incorporate by reference six 

industry standards and test procedures. 

77 FR 77914, 77916 (Dec. 15, 2011). 

These references were American 

National Standards Institute (ANSI) 

C78.379–2006, ‘‘For Electric Lamps— 

Classification of the Beam Patterns of 

Reflector Lamps’’; ANSI C78.389– 

R2009, ‘‘For Electric Lamps—High 

Intensity Discharge—Methods of 

Measuring Characteristics’’ (sections 

1.0, 2.0, 3.0, and Figure 1); International 

Commission on Illumination (CIE) 13.3– 

1995, ‘‘Technical Report: Method of 

Measuring and Specifying Colour 

Rendering Properties of Light Sources’’; 

CIE 15:2004, ‘‘Technical Report: 

Colorimetry’’; Illuminating Engineering 

Society of North America (IES) LM–51– 

00, ‘‘Approved Method for the Electrical 

and Photometric Measurements of High 

Intensity Discharge Lamps’’ (sections 

1.0, 3.2, 9.0, 10.0, 11.0, and 12.0); and 

IES LM–47–01, ‘‘Approved Method for 

Life Testing of High Intensity Discharge 

Lamps.’’ In today’s SNOPR, DOE 

proposes to update its references to 

incorporate IES LM–51–13, ‘‘Approved 

Method for the Electrical and 

Photometric Measurements of High 

Intensity Discharge Lamps.’’ DOE also 

proposes to incorporate by reference one 

additional standard: IES LM–78–07, 

‘‘IESNA Approved Method for Total 

Luminous Flux Measurement of Lamps 

Using an Integrating Sphere 

Photometer.’’ 

During the January 2012 HID TP 

public meeting, Intertek commented 

that IES LM–47–01 was more than 10 

years old and had been updated. 

(Intertek, Public Meeting Transcript, No. 

5 at p. 121) 3 IES subsequently released 

LM–47–12. DOE no longer proposes to 

measure lumen maintenance; therefore, 

DOE no longer proposes to incorporate 

by reference in this SNOPR LM–47–12. 

Intertek also commented during the 

January 2012 HID TP public meeting 

that IES LM–51–00 was expected to be 

revised in the latter part of 2012. 

(Intertek, Public Meeting Transcript, No. 

5 at p. 121) DOE notes that a revised 

version of IES LM–51 (IES LM–51–13) 

has been released, which DOE proposes 

to incorporate by reference in this 

SNOPR. 

The National Electrical Manufacturers 

Association (NEMA) expressed general 

support for LM–51, but requested more 

specificity related to instrumentation, 

and suggested that DOE incorporate by 

reference IES LM–78–07. (NEMA, No. 6 

at p. 8) 4 DOE reviewed this test method 

and proposes to incorporate by 

reference IES LM–78–07, ‘‘IESNA 

Approved Method for Total Luminous 

Flux Measurement of Lamps Using an 

Integrating Sphere Photometer,’’ 

sections 3.1 and 6.3, in this SNOPR. 

B. Definitions 

In the December 2011 TP NOPR, DOE 

proposed definitions for the following 

terms based on the EPCA definitions of 

these terms: ‘‘Ballast’’ (42 U.S.C. 

6291(58)), ‘‘color rendering index’’ (42 

U.S.C. 6291(30)(J)), ‘‘correlated color 

temperature’’ (42 U.S.C. 6291(30)(K)), 

‘‘high-intensity discharge lamp’’ (42 

U.S.C. 6291(46)), ‘‘mercury vapor lamp’’ 

(42 U.S.C. 6291(47)(A)), and ‘‘metal 

halide lamp’’ (42 U.S.C. 6291(63)). 76 

FR 77914, 77917–18 (Dec. 15, 2011). 

These EPCA definitions remain 

unchanged by this SNOPR. 

As explained in section II.B.1 of this 

SNOPR, DOE proposed to establish 

definitions of ‘‘beam angle,’’ 

‘‘directional lamp,’’ ‘‘high-pressure 

sodium lamp,’’ ‘‘lamp electrical power 

input,’’ ‘‘lamp efficacy,’’ ‘‘lamp 

wattage,’’ ‘‘lumen maintenance,’’ ‘‘rated 

luminous flux or rated lumen output,’’ 

and ‘‘self-ballasted lamp’’ in the 

December 2011 TP NOPR. Many of the 

proposed definitions were identical or 

very similar to the definitions set forth 

in 10 CFR part 430 for consumer 

products. Since the publication of the 

December 2011 TP NOPR, DOE has 

determined that changes are warranted 

for some of the proposed definitions, 

and that others are not necessary (‘‘beam 

angle,’’ ‘‘lamp electrical power input,’’ 

‘‘lumen maintenance,’’ and ‘‘rated 

luminous flux or rated lumen output’’) 

to include in the test procedures for HID 

lamps. 

As discussed in sections II.B.2 and 

II.B.3 of this SNOPR, respectively, DOE 

also proposed in the December 2011 TP 

NOPR to amend the definition of 

‘‘ballast efficiency’’ and to establish a 

definition of ‘‘basic model’’ for HID 

lamps. In this SNOPR, DOE withdraws 

the amendment proposed in the 

December 2011 TP NOPR and proposes 

to retain the existing definition of 

‘‘ballast efficiency.’’ In addition, DOE 

proposes revisions to the definition of 

‘‘basic model’’ for HID lamps set forth 

in the December 2011 TP NOPR. 

1. Definitions Relevant to High-Intensity 

Discharge Lamps 

a. Beam Angle 

In the December 2011 TP NOPR, DOE 

proposed to define ‘‘beam angle’’ as ‘‘the 

beam angle (or angles) as measured 

according to the requirements of ANSI 

C78.379, including complex beam 

angles as described in ANSI C78.379.’’ 

76 FR 77914, 77917 (Dec. 15, 2011). In 

comments on the NOPR, NEMA agreed 

with the proposed definition of beam 

angle (NEMA, No. 6 at p. 4), and DOE 

received no other comments supporting 

or opposing this proposed definition. 

DOE notes, however, that, as stated in 

the April 2013 HID lamps energy 

conservation standards (ECS) Interim 

Analysis public meeting. DOE is not 

considering standards for directional 

lamps in the HID lamps energy 

conservation standards (Docket No. 

EERE–2010–BT–STD–0043, DOE, Public 

Meeting Transcript, No. 23, at p. 18).5

For this reason, in this SNOPR, DOE 

withdraws the proposed definition of 

‘‘beam angle’’ in the HID test 

procedures. 

b. Color Rendering Index 

In the December 2011 TP NOPR, DOE 

proposed to adopt a definition of ‘‘color 

rendering index’’ (CRI) based on the 

EPCA definition of the same term. 76 FR 

77914, 77917 (Dec. 15, 2011); see also 

42 U.S.C. 6291(30)(J). The proposed 

definition was adopted from 10 CFR 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS3

Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 99 / Thursday, May 22, 2014 / Proposed Rules 29635 

6The definitions of ‘‘color rendering index’’ in 

EPCA and 10 CFR 430.2 are substantively identical, 

excluding a minor wording difference. The EPCA 

definition uses the phrase ‘‘measure of the degree 

of color shift’’ whereas the CFR definition uses the 

phrase ‘‘measured degree of color shift.’’ 42 U.S.C. 

6291(30)(J); 10 CFR 430.2. 

7 10 CFR 431.454(b)(1) is a new section proposed 

by this SNOPR. 

8 10 CFR 430.2 defines lamp efficacy as ‘‘the 

measured lumen output of a lamp in lumens 

divided by the measured lamp electrical power 

input in watts expressed in units of lumens per watt 

(LPW).’’ 10 CFR part 430, subpart B, appendix R 

defines ‘‘lamp efficacy’’ as ‘‘the ratio of measured 

lamp lumen output in lumens to the measured lamp 

electrical power input in watts, rounded to the 

nearest tenth, in units of lumens per watt.’’ The 

primary difference between the definitions is the 

rounding of the values. 

430.2, which defines CRI as ‘‘the 

measured degree of color shift objects 

undergo when illuminated by a light 

source as compared with the color of 

those same objects when illuminated by 

a reference source of comparable color 

temperature.’’ 6. DOE received no 

comments supporting or opposing this 

proposed definition and maintains the 

proposal for this SNOPR. 

c. Correlated Color Temperature 

In the December 2011 TP NOPR, DOE 

proposed to adopt the EPCA definition 

of ‘‘correlated color temperature’’ (CCT) 

(42 U.S.C. 6291(30)(K)), which defines 

the term as ‘‘the absolute temperature of 

a blackbody whose chromaticity most 

nearly resembles that of the light 

source.’’ 76 FR 77914, 77917 (Dec. 15, 

2011). DOE received no comments 

supporting or opposing this proposed 

definition and maintains the proposal 

for this SNOPR. 

d. Directional Lamp 

In the December 2011 TP NOPR, DOE 

proposed to define ‘‘directional lamp’’ 

as ‘‘a lamp emitting at least 80 percent 

of its light output within a solid angle 

of p steradians (corresponding to a cone 

with an angle of 120 degrees).’’ 76 FR 

77914, 77917 (Dec. 15, 2011). NEMA 

agreed with the proposed definition of 

directional lamp. (NEMA, No. 6 at p. 4) 

DOE received no other comments 

supporting or opposing the proposed 

definition. DOE proposes to modify the 

definition to also incorporate the 

construction of the lamp. DOE proposes 

a revised definition of ‘‘directional 

lamp’’ as ‘‘a lamp with an integral 

reflector, emitting at least 80 percent of 

its light output within a solid angle of 

p steradians (corresponding to a cone 

with an angle of 120 degrees)’’ in this 

SNOPR to clarify the lamp type that 

DOE is considering excluding from 

coverage in the ongoing HID lamps 

standards rulemaking (Docket No. 

EERE–2010–BT–STD–0043). 

e. Initial Lumen Output 

In this SNOPR, DOE proposes to add 

a definition of ‘‘initial lumen output’’ to 

provide additional clarity. Initial lumen 

output is the measured amount of light 

that a lamp provides at the beginning of 

its life. An initial lumen output 

measurement is required to calculate 

lamp efficacy. Therefore, DOE proposes 

a definition of ‘‘initial lumen output’’ as 

‘‘the measured lumen output after the 

lamp is seasoned, then initially 

energized and stabilized, using the lamp 

seasoning and stabilization procedures 

in section 10 CFR 431.454(b)(1).’’ 7

f. High-Pressure Sodium Lamp 

In the December 2011 TP NOPR, DOE 

proposed to define ‘‘high-pressure 

sodium lamp’’ (HPS) as ‘‘a highintensity discharge lamp in which the 

major portion of the light is produced by 

radiation from sodium vapor operating 

at a partial pressure of about 6,670 

pascals (approximately 0.066 

atmospheres or 50 torr) or greater.’’ 76 

FR 77914, 77917 (Dec. 15, 2011). NEMA 

agreed with the proposed definition of 

‘‘high-pressure sodium lamp’’ (NEMA, 

No. 6 at p. 5), and DOE received no 

other comments supporting or opposing 

this proposed definition. Therefore, 

DOE retains this definition in this 

SNOPR. 

g. Lamp Efficacy 

In the December 2011 TP NOPR, DOE 

proposed a definition for ‘‘lamp 

efficacy’’ similar to that set forth at 10 

CFR part 430, subpart B, appendix R,8

where ‘‘lamp efficacy’’ is defined as 

‘‘the ratio of measured lamp lumen 

output in lumens to the measured lamp 

electrical power input in watts, rounded 

to the nearest tenth, in units of lumens 

per watt.’’ DOE proposed to replace 

‘‘lamp lumen output’’ with ‘‘rated 

luminous flux or rated lumen output’’ 

and to add the abbreviation ‘‘lm/W’’ 

after ‘‘lumens per watt.’’ DOE further 

stated that the term ‘‘rated luminous 

flux or rated lumen output’’ is 

consistent with DOE’s proposed 

definition for ‘‘lumen maintenance,’’ 

and means the same thing as ‘‘lamp 

lumen output.’’ Therefore, DOE 

proposed a definition for ‘‘lamp 

efficacy’’ as follows: ‘‘the ratio of rated 

lumen output (or rated luminous flux) 

to the measured lamp electrical power 

input in watts, rounded to the nearest 

tenth, in units of lumens per watt (lm/ 

W).’’ 76 FR 77914, 77918 (Dec. 15, 

2011). 

NEMA disagreed with DOE’s use of 

‘‘rated luminous flux or rated lumen 

output’’ as an equivalent to ‘‘measured 

lamp lumen output,’’ stating that the 

terms ‘‘rated’’ and ‘‘measured’’ are not 

interchangeable. (NEMA, No. 6 at pp. 2, 

5) NEMA suggested that DOE instead 

use the definition for lamp efficacy in 

IES RP–16–10, ‘‘Nomenclature and 

Definitions for Illuminating 

Engineering’’ (RP–16). (NEMA, No. 6 at 

p. 5) NEMA refined its comments 

during the March 2012 framework 

public meeting for the HID lamps energy 

conservation standards (herein referred 

to as the March 2012 ECS public 

meeting), stating that upon a second 

review of RP–16, ‘‘lamp efficacy’’ is not 

defined, but ‘‘luminous efficacy’’ is 

defined, and encouraged DOE to use 

‘‘luminous efficacy’’ as the appropriate 

term. (Docket No. EERE–2010–BT–STD– 

0043, NEMA, Public Meeting 

Transcript, No. 6 at p. 40) The RP–16 

definition for ‘‘luminous efficacy of a 

source of light’’ is ‘‘. . . the quotient of 

the luminous flux emitted by the total 

lamp power input. It is expressed in 

lm/W.’’ 

DOE acknowledges that ‘‘lamp 

efficacy’’ is not defined in RP–16, but 

notes that ‘‘lamp efficacy,’’ rather than 

‘‘luminous efficacy,’’ is used for all 

other covered lamps and is the common 

term in the lighting industry. Therefore, 

in this SNOPR, DOE proposes to keep 

the term ‘‘lamp efficacy,’’ but to revise 

the definition proposed in the December 

2011 TP NOPR. 

DOE acknowledges NEMA’s statement 

that a rated value is a value declared by 

the manufacturer to represent the longterm average of any given parameter. 

(NEMA, No. 6 at p. 2) DOE proposes to 

revise the definition of ‘‘lamp efficacy’’ 

to be consistent with the definition of 

‘‘lamp efficacy’’ in EPCA and simply 

use the terms ‘‘lumen output’’ and 

‘‘wattage.’’ DOE includes additional 

language in its test procedures that 

qualifies lamp lumen output and 

wattage as ‘‘measured.’’ 

The proposed definition for ‘‘lamp 

efficacy’’ in the December 2011 TP 

NOPR specified that efficacy values 

(lumens per watt) be rounded to the 

nearest tenth. Lamp manufacturers 

OSRAM SYLVANIA and Philips 

Electronics (Philips) commented that 

HID lamp measurements vary widely 

because of the lamp chemistry used in 

HID lamps, the operating characteristics 

of high-lumen-output HID lamps, and 

the sheer light output of HID lamps 

(ranging from a few thousand to over a 

hundred thousand lumens), and stated 

that rounding calculated efficacies to 

the nearest tenth implies a measurement 

accuracy that is not achievable. 

(OSRAM SYLVANIA, Public Meeting 

Transcript, No. 5 at p. 32; Philips, 

Public Meeting Transcript, No. 5 at p. 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS3

29636 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 99 / Thursday, May 22, 2014 / Proposed Rules 

9The EPCA definition for ‘‘lamp wattage’’ is ‘‘the 

total electrical power consumed by a lamp in watts, 

after the initial seasoning period referenced in the 

appropriate IES standard test procedures and 

including, for fluorescent, arc watts plus cathode 

watts.’’ 

32) NEMA agreed with OSRAM 

SYLVANIA and Philips that rounding to 

the nearest tenth (of a lumen per watt) 

is inappropriate for HID lamps because 

of the large potential for measurement 

variation. NEMA also commented that 

rounding of lamp efficacy values should 

be addressed in reporting requirements 

rather than the definition. (NEMA, No. 

6 at p. 5) 

DOE’s proposed definition for ‘‘lamp 

efficacy’’ was based on the definition in 

the test procedures for general service 

fluorescent lamps, general service 

incandescent lamps, and incandescent 

reflector lamps (GSFL/GSIL/IRL) at 10 

CFR part 430, subpart B, appendix R. 

For GSFL/GSIL/IRL, rounding lamp 

efficacy values to the nearest tenth is 

appropriate given the equipment and 

instrumentation used to measure lumen 

output and lamp wattage for these lamp 

types. Because the same equipment and 

instrumentation is used to measure 

these quantities for HID lamps, DOE 

believes lamp efficacy for HID lamps 

should also be rounded to the nearest 

tenth of a lumen per watt. DOE agrees 

with NEMA, however, that rounding 

requirements should not be part of the 

definition of lamp efficacy, and believes 

that rounding should instead be 

addressed in any future reporting 

requirements for HID lamps. 

DOE notes that manufacturers have 

commented that HID lamps exhibit 

more measurement variation than other 

lighting technologies. DOE plans to 

account for measurement variation in 

the energy conservation standards 

rulemaking for HID lamps and 

welcomes comments on sources of 

measurement variation and any 

supporting data in that rule process. 

DOE reviewed comments received on 

the December 2011 TP NOPR as well as 

alternative definitions of lamp efficacy. 

To be consistent with EPCA, DOE 

proposes to revise the definition of 

‘‘lamp efficacy’’ for HID lamps as 

follows: ‘‘the lumen output of a lamp 

divided by its wattage, expressed in 

lumens per watt (LPW).’’ 

h. Lamp Electrical Power Input 

In the December 2011 TP NOPR, DOE 

proposed to define ‘‘lamp electrical 

power input’’ as ‘‘the total electrical 

power input to the lamp, including both 

arc and cathode power where 

appropriate, at the reference condition, 

in units of watts.’’ 76 FR 77914, 77918 

(Dec. 15, 2011). This definition is the 

same as that set forth at 10 CFR part 430, 

subpart B, appendix R. 

NEMA disagreed with the proposed 

definition, noting that HID lamps do not 

have cathodes (or use cathode power), 

and that arc power constitutes total 

lamp input power. (NEMA, Public 

Meeting Transcript, No. 5 at pp. 44–45) 

DOE received no other comments 

related to the proposed definition. 

DOE acknowledges that arc power 

constitutes total lamp electrical power 

input for HID lamps. ‘‘Lamp electrical 

power input’’ is therefore the same as 

‘‘lamp wattage,’’ which DOE also 

defined in the December 2011 TP 

NOPR. 76 FR 77914, 77918 (Dec. 15, 

2011). As discussed earlier in this 

document, DOE proposes to use the 

term ‘‘lamp wattage’’ instead of ‘‘lamp 

electrical power input’’ in its revised 

definition for ‘‘lamp efficacy.’’ 

Therefore, in this SNOPR, DOE 

withdraws the proposed definition of 

‘‘lamp electrical power input’’ for HID 

lamps as proposed in the December 

2011 TP NOPR. Id. 

i. Lamp Wattage 

In the December 2011 TP NOPR, DOE 

proposed to define ‘‘lamp wattage’’ as 

‘‘the total electrical power required by a 

lamp in watts, measured following the 

initial aging period referenced in the 

relevant industry standard.’’ The 

proposed definition interpreted the 

EPCA definition of ‘‘lamp wattage’’ for 

this rulemaking. 76 FR 77914, 77918 

(Dec. 15, 2011); see also 42 U.S.C. 

6291(30)(O).9 NEMA agreed with the 

proposed definition of lamp wattage. 

(NEMA, No. 6 at p. 5) DOE received no 

other comments supporting or opposing 

this proposed definition. 

In this SNOPR, DOE proposes to 

modify its original proposed definition 

of ‘‘lamp wattage’’ to more closely 

parallel the EPCA definition of ‘‘lamp 

wattage,’’ and to reference the 

applicable IES lamp seasoning 

provisions required to support lamp 

wattage measurements. Specifically, 

DOE proposes to replace ‘‘measured 

following the initial aging period 

referenced in the relevant industry 

standard’’ with ‘‘after the initial 

seasoning period referenced in section 

6.2.1 of IES LM–51–13.’’ 

Therefore, DOE proposes in this 

SNOPR to define ‘‘lamp wattage’’ as 

‘‘the total electrical power consumed by 

a lamp in watts, after the initial 

seasoning period referenced in section 

6.2.1 of IES LM–51–13.’’ 

As previously discussed in this 

SNOPR, DOE is proposing a new 

definition of ‘‘lamp efficacy’’ in which 

the term ‘‘measured lamp electrical 

power in watts’’ is replaced with 

‘‘wattage.’’ DOE defined ‘‘lamp wattage’’ 

in the December 2011 TP NOPR and 

interprets it as equivalent to the term 

‘‘wattage.’’ 

j. Lumen Maintenance 

In the December 2011 TP NOPR, DOE 

proposed to define ‘‘lumen 

maintenance’’ as ‘‘the luminous flux or 

lumen output at a given time in the life 

of the lamp and expressed as a 

percentage of the rated luminous flux or 

rated lumen output, respectively.’’ 76 

FR 77914, 77918 (Dec. 15, 2011). This 

definition is the same as that set forth 

for medium-base compact fluorescent 

lamps (CFLs) at 10 CFR part 430, 

subpart B, appendix W, section (2)(c). 

Pacific Gas and Electric Company, 

San Diego Gas and Electric, Southern 

California Gas Company, and Southern 

California Edison (herein referred to as 

the California Investor Owned Utilities 

(CA IOUs)), together with the Appliance 

Standards Awareness Project, American 

Council for an Energy-Efficient 

Economy, and the Natural Resources 

Defense Council jointly filed a comment 

(herein referred to as the Joint 

Comment) that supported measuring 

lumen maintenance for HID lamps, but 

did not comment specifically on the 

proposed definition. (CA IOUs, No. 8 at 

p. 1; Joint Comment, No. 9 at p. 1) 

NEMA disagreed with the definition, 

citing inconsistent references to 

measured and rated values. NEMA 

disagreed with DOE’s use of ‘‘rated 

luminous flux or rated lumen output’’ as 

an equivalent to ‘‘measured lamp lumen 

output,’’ stating that the terms ‘‘rated’’ 

and ‘‘measured’’ are not 

interchangeable. According to NEMA, 

because measured values were expected 

to be reported, possible confusion and 

misreporting could arise if rated values 

were reported instead. (NEMA, No. 6 at 

pp. 2, 5–6) 

DOE no longer proposes to measure 

lumen maintenance. Therefore, in this 

SNOPR, DOE withdraws the proposed 

definition of ‘‘lumen maintenance’’ for 

HID lamps as proposed in the December 

2011 TP NOPR. 76 FR 77914, 77918 

(December 15, 2011). 

k. Rated Luminous Flux or Rated Lumen 

Output 

In the December 2011 TP NOPR, DOE 

proposed to define ‘‘rated luminous flux 

or rated lumen output’’ as ‘‘the initial 

lumen rating (100 hour) declared by the 

manufacturer, which consists of the 

lumen rating of a lamp at the end of 100 

hours of operation.’’ This is the same 

definition set forth for medium-base 

CFLs at 10 CFR part 430, subpart B, 

appendix W, section (2)(d), and 

proposed in the December 2011 TP 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS3

Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 99 / Thursday, May 22, 2014 / Proposed Rules 29637 

10This definition is based in part on the 

definition of ‘‘self-ballasted CFL lamp’’ found at 10 

CFR part 430, subpart B, appendix W, section (2)(h). 

11 DOE discussed the concept of ‘‘basic model’’ 

extensively in the September 2010 NOPR for 

certification, compliance, and enforcement 

(September 2010 CC&E NOPR). 75 FR 56796, 

56798–99 (Sept. 16, 2010). DOE provided additional 

discussion and responded to comments received 

related to the September 2010 CC&E NOPR in the 

March 2011 certification, compliance, and 

enforcement final rule. 76 FR 12422, 12428–30 

(March 7, 2011). 

NOPR. 76 FR 77914, 77918 (Dec. 15, 

2011). NEMA agreed with the proposed 

definition of ‘‘rated luminous flux or 

rated lumen output.’’ (NEMA, No. 6 at 

p. 4) DOE received no other comments 

supporting or opposing this proposed 

definition. 

DOE has removed the term ‘‘rated 

luminous flux or rated lumen output’’ 

from the proposed definition of ‘‘lamp 

efficacy’’ in this SNOPR. Therefore, in 

this SNOPR, DOE proposes to withdraw 

the proposed definition of ‘‘rated 

luminous flux or rated lumen output’’ 

for HID lamps as proposed in the 

December 2011 TP NOPR. 76 FR 77914, 

77918 (Dec. 15, 2011). 

l. Self-Ballasted Lamp 

In the December 2011 TP NOPR, DOE 

proposed to define ‘‘self-ballasted lamp’’ 

as ‘‘a lamp unit that incorporates all 

elements that are necessary for the 

starting and stable operation of the lamp 

in a permanent enclosure and that does 

not include any replaceable or 

interchangeable parts.’’ 76 FR 77914, 

77918 (Dec. 15, 2011).10 NEMA agreed 

with the proposed definition, and DOE 

received no other comments supporting 

or opposing this proposed definition. 

(NEMA, No. 6 at p. 4) Therefore, DOE 

retains the December 2011 TP NOPR 

proposed definition in this SNOPR. 

2. Definition of ‘‘Ballast Efficiency’’ for 

Metal Halide Lamp Fixtures 

In the December 2011 TP NOPR, DOE 

proposed an amended definition of 

‘‘ballast efficiency’’ for HID fixtures, 

currently set forth at 10 CFR 431.322. 76 

FR 77914, 77918 (Dec. 15, 2011). 

Currently, ‘‘ballast efficiency’’ for an 

HID fixture means, in relevant part, ‘‘the 

efficiency of a lamp and ballast 

combination, expressed as a percentage, 

and calculated in accordance with the 

following formula: 

Efficiency = Pout/Pin

Where: 

(1) Pout equals the measured operating lamp 

wattage; 

(2) Pin equals the measured operating input 

wattage . . .’’ 

10 CFR 431.322 

In the December 2011 TP NOPR, DOE 

noted that the definition of the term 

‘‘Pout’’ is the same as the definition DOE 

proposed for ‘‘lamp electrical power 

input.’’ In order to avoid possible 

confusion between ‘‘Pout’’ and ‘‘lamp 

electrical power input,’’ DOE proposed 

in the December 2011 TP NOPR to 

amend the definition of ‘‘ballast 

efficiency’’ as follows: ‘‘ ‘Ballast 

efficiency’ means, in the case of a highintensity discharge fixture, the 

efficiency of a lamp and ballast 

combination, expressed as a percentage, 

and calculated in accordance with the 

following formula: 

Efficiency = Lamp electrical power 

input/ballast power input 

Where: 

(1) Lamp electrical power input means the 

total electrical power input to the lamp, 

including both arc and cathode power where 

appropriate, at the reference condition, in 

units of watts; 

(2) Ballast power input equals the 

measured operating input wattage . . .’’ 

76 FR 77914, 77198 (Dec. 15, 2011). 

NEMA commented that the proposed 

definition would produce inaccurate 

results for ballast efficiency because the 

lamp and ballast power inputs are 

measured at reference and non-reference 

conditions, respectively. (NEMA, No. 6 

at pp. 6–7) DOE received no other 

comments related to the proposed 

definition of ‘‘ballast efficiency.’’ 

Upon review, DOE determined that 

HID lamp testing and MH lamp ballast 

testing are conducted separately, which 

effectively eliminates any overlap and 

confusion of electrical power terms. As 

discussed earlier in this document, DOE 

proposes to use the term ‘‘wattage’’ 

instead of ‘‘lamp electrical power input’’ 

in its revised definition for ‘‘lamp 

efficacy.’’ Therefore, in this SNOPR, 

DOE withdraws the proposed definition 

of ‘‘lamp electrical power input’’ for 

HID lamps. In addition, DOE 

acknowledges that testing inaccuracies 

could arise from the proposed definition 

for ‘‘ballast efficiency,’’ which was 

intended to prevent confusion between 

the terms ‘‘Pout’’ and ‘‘lamp electrical 

power input.’’ Because HID lamp testing 

and MH lamp ballast testing are 

conducted separately and DOE no 

longer proposes to define ‘‘lamp 

electrical power input,’’ this potential 

confusion should not materialize. 

Therefore, DOE is not proposing to 

amend the current definition of ‘‘ballast 

efficiency’’ at 10 CFR 431.322 in this 

SNOPR. 

3. Definition of ‘‘Basic Model’’ for HighIntensity Discharge Lamps 

In the December 2011 TP NOPR, DOE 

proposed defining ‘‘basic model’’ for the 

HID lamp test procedures as follows: 

‘‘ ‘Basic model’ with respect to HID 

lamps means all units of a given type of 

covered equipment (or class thereof) 

manufactured by one manufacturer, 

having the same primary energy source 

and which have essentially identical 

electrical, physical, and functional (or 

hydraulic) characteristics that affect 

energy consumption, energy efficiency, 

water consumption, or water efficiency, 

and are rated to operate a given lamp 

type and wattage.’’ 76 FR 77914, 77918 

(Dec. 15, 2011).11

NEMA commented that the definition 

of ‘‘basic model’’ should be addressed in 

the HID lamps standards, and not the 

test procedures. (NEMA, Public Meeting 

Transcript, No. 5 at p. 32) Because 

provisions regarding the definition of 

basic model relate closely to the 

sampling plan and test burdens that the 

test procedures address, DOE addresses 

the definition of basic model in its test 

procedures rulemaking. DOE will 

consider comments submitted to the 

ongoing HID lamps standards 

rulemaking (Docket No. EERE–2010– 

BT–STD–0043) to develop the definition 

of ‘‘basic model,’’ and DOE will use the 

same definition of ‘‘basic model’’ in the 

standards rulemaking. 

At the January 2012 TP public 

meeting, General Electric (GE) 

commented that the terms ‘‘hydraulic’’ 

or ‘‘water consumption’’ in the 

definition of ‘‘basic model’’ for HID 

lamps are potentially confusing and 

should be removed. (GE, Public Meeting 

Transcript, No. 5 at p. 33) In response 

to GE’s comment, DOE reviewed the 

definition of ‘‘basic model’’ for MH 

lamp fixtures at 10 CFR 431.322. The 

definition of ‘‘basic model’’ at 10 CFR 

431.322 is the same as the definition 

that DOE proposed in the December 

2011 TP NOPR. DOE also reviewed the 

‘‘basic model’’ definition for GSFL/

GSIL/IRL at 10 CFR 430.2 and notes that 

this definition of basic model is general 

and applies to faucets and showerheads 

in addition to the various lamp types. 

But DOE acknowledges that the terms 

identified by GE may cause confusion 

with respect to HID lamps. DOE also 

notes that the definition of ‘‘basic 

model’’ proposed in the December 2011 

TP NOPR contains the phrase ‘‘and are 

rated to operate a given lamp type and 

wattage,’’ which applies to lamp ballasts 

(i.e., for MH lamp fixtures in 10 CFR 

431.322), but does not apply to HID 

lamps. Further, DOE notes that 

‘‘efficacy’’ is a more appropriate term for 

describing the energy efficiency of HID 

lamps than the term ‘‘energy efficiency’’ 

used in the proposed definition of 

‘‘basic model.’’ To more accurately 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS3

29638 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 99 / Thursday, May 22, 2014 / Proposed Rules 

characterize HID lamps, DOE proposes 

to remove the phrase ‘‘and are rated to 

operate a given lamp type and wattage’’ 

from the definition of ‘‘basic model,’’ 

and revise the remaining text by 

replacing the term ‘‘energy efficiency’’ 

with the term ‘‘efficacy.’’ 

Therefore, in this SNOPR, DOE 

proposes to define ‘‘basic model’’ for 

HID lamp test procedures to read as 

follows: ‘‘ ‘Basic model’ means all units 

of a given type of covered equipment (or 

class thereof) manufactured by one 

manufacturer, that have the same 

primary energy source, and that have 

essentially identical electrical, physical, 

and functional characteristics that affect 

energy consumption or efficacy.’’ 

C. Test Procedures for Measuring Energy 

Efficiency of High-Intensity Discharge 

Lamps 

1. Test Setup and Conditions 

DOE has determined that changes are 

warranted for certain test setup and 

condition requirements proposed in the 

December 2011 TP NOPR. In the 

discussion that follows, DOE describes 

the December 2011 TP NOPR proposals 

for ambient conditions, power supply 

characteristics, reference ballasts, and 

instrumentation. DOE also describes the 

changes being proposed in this SNOPR 

and notes those provisions that remain 

unaffected. 

a. Ambient Conditions 

In the December 2011 TP NOPR, DOE 

proposed a requirement that the test 

apparatus be operated in a location 

where ambient conditions (e.g., ambient 

temperature) are stable. 76 FR 77914, 

77919 (Dec. 15, 2011). As described in 

the following paragraphs, in this 

SNOPR, DOE proposes to revise certain 

specifications necessary to meet the 

requirement for stable ambient 

conditions. 

i. Ambient Test Temperature 

In the December 2011 TP NOPR, DOE 

proposed an ambient temperature 

requirement of 25 °C ±5 °C for HID lamp 

testing in accordance with ANSI 

C78.389. 76 FR 77914, 77919 (Dec. 15, 

2011). This is the industry standard 

temperature for testing most ballasted 

and non-ballasted light sources (both 

HID and other lamp types). It is also the 

temperature required by the MH lamp 

ballast TP final rule, wherein DOE 

stated that ambient temperature is not 

critical to MH lamp operation and light 

output, but can affect lamp electrical 

performance. 75 FR 10950, 10956 

(March 9, 2010). 

NEMA agreed with the proposed 

ambient test temperature for HID lamps 

(25 °C ±5 °C), but noted that other lamp 

types have a ±1 °C tolerance for 

photometric testing. (NEMA, No. 6 at p. 

7) OSRAM SYLVANIA commented that, 

unlike fluorescent lamps, HID lamps are 

not significantly affected by ambient 

temperature. OSRAM SYLVANIA also 

stated that the ambient temperature 

required in IES standard LM–51 is 

intended to benefit the measurement 

instrumentation, which is more 

sensitive to ambient temperature 

variations than the HID lamps being 

tested. (OSRAM SYLVANIA, Public 

Meeting Transcript, No. 5 at pp. 49, 54) 

DOE reviewed applicable ANSI and 

IES documents for testing discharge 

lamps (fluorescent and HID) and 

fixtures. Table II.1 compares the 

recommended ambient test 

temperatures from these documents. 

TABLE II.1—COMPARISON OF RECOMMENDED AMBIENT TEST TEMPERATURES

Document Light source Ambient test 

temperature 

LM–51–13, ‘‘IESNA Approved Method for the Electrical and Photometric Measurements of High-Intensity Discharge Lamps’’.HID ................. 25 °C ±5 °C 

LM–73–04 (R2010), ‘‘IESNA Approved Method for Photometric Testing of Entertainment Lighting Luminaires 

Using Incandescent Filament Lamps or High Intensity Discharge Lamps’’.

HID ................. 25 °C ±5 °C 

ANSI C78.389, ‘‘American National Standard for Electric Lamps—High Intensity Discharge—Methods of 

Measuring Characteristics’’.

HID ................. 25 °C ±5 °C 

LM–09–09, ‘‘Electrical and Photometric Measurements of Fluorescent Lamps’’ .................................................. Fluorescent .... 25 °C ±1 °C 

LM–66–11, ‘‘Electrical and Photometric Measurements of Single-Ended Compact Fluorescent Lamps’’ ........... Fluorescent .... 25 °C ±1 °C 

ANSI C78.375—1997, ‘‘American National Standard for Fluorescent Lamps—Guide for Electrical Measurements’’.Fluorescent .... 25 °C ±1 °C 

DOE acknowledges that for 

fluorescent sources, the tolerance in 

these documents for ambient test 

temperature is ±1 °C. DOE also agrees 

with OSRAM SYLVANIA that ambient 

temperature is not critical to HID lamp 

operation and light output. Therefore, in 

this SNOPR, DOE retains the ambient 

temperature and tolerance of 25 °C ±5 °C 

proposed in the December 2011 TP 

NOPR. However, as discussed in section 

II.C.1.a.ii, DOE proposes referencing the 

25 °C ±5 °C requirement in IES LM–51– 

13 based on the absence of the 

associated maximum air speed 

requirement. 

ii. Air Speed 

In the December 2011 TP NOPR, DOE 

proposed a specific air speed limit of 

≤0.5 meters per second (m/s) for HID 

lamp testing because the ANSI C78.389 

requirement for ‘‘draft-free’’ conditions 

is unclear because no definition of the 

term ‘‘draft-free’’ is provided in the 

standard. In the MH lamp ballast TP 

final rule, DOE researched different air 

speed limits from different test 

procedures and adopted an air speed 

limit of ≤0.5 m/s. 75 FR 10950, 10956 

(March 9, 2010). In its comments on the 

December 2011 TP NOPR, OSRAM 

SYLVANIA stated that air speed is 

relevant for ballast measurements, but 

not for HID lamps. OSRAM SYLVANIA 

elaborated by stating that the typical 

‘‘lamp within a lamp’’ construction of 

HID lamps (i.e., arc tube within an outer 

glass envelope) makes them insensitive 

to ambient air movement. (OSRAM 

SYLVANIA, Public Meeting Transcript, 

No. 5 at pp. 47–50) NEMA agreed with 

this assessment. (NEMA, No. 6 at p. 8) 

In the December 2011 TP NOPR, DOE 

reviewed LM–51–13, ANSI C78.389, 

and LM–73–04 for the ambient test 

temperature requirements discussed 

previously. Table II.2 provides the 

review of air speed limits for HID lamp 

and fixture testing. 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS3

Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 99 / Thursday, May 22, 2014 / Proposed Rules 29639 

12California Energy Commission’s Public Interest 

Energy Research Program, Philips Energy 

Continued 

TABLE II.2—COMPARISON OF AIR SPEED LIMITS FOR HID LAMP AND FIXTURE TESTING

Document Air Speed Requirements 

LM–51–13, ‘‘IESNA Approved Method for the Electrical and Photometric Measurements of High-Intensity 

Discharge Lamps’’.

No special precautions against normal room air movement are necessary. 

LM–73–04 (R2010), ‘‘IESNA Approved Method for Photometric Testing of Entertainment Lighting Luminaries Using Incandescent Filament Lamps or High Intensity Discharge Lamps’’.None specified. 

ANSI C78.389, ‘‘American National Standard for Electric Lamps—High Intensity Discharge—Methods of 

Measuring Characteristics’’.

Draft free. 

DOE agrees with OSRAM SYLVANIA 

and NEMA that HID lamps are typically 

insensitive to ambient air movement 

because the light-generating component 

of the lamp (i.e., the arc tube) is 

physically isolated from the 

surrounding environment by an outer 

glass envelope, effectively eliminating 

any convection cooling. Therefore, in 

this SNOPR, DOE proposes not to 

prescribe an explicit air speed limit in 

the HID lamps test procedures. Instead, 

DOE proposes to incorporate by 

reference section 4.3 of LM–51–13, 

which specifies that no special 

precautions against normal air 

movement are necessary in HID lamp 

test procedures. 

b. Power Supply Characteristics 

In the December 2011 TP NOPR, DOE 

proposed power supply characteristics 

(voltage waveshape, voltage regulation, 

and power supply impedance) for the 

HID lamps test procedures based on 

ANSI C78.389 and LM–51. 76 FR 77914, 

77919 (Dec. 15, 2011). NEMA agreed 

with DOE’s proposal (NEMA, No. 6 at p. 

8), and DOE received no other 

comments on these characteristics. As a 

result, the power supply characteristics 

are not affected by this SNOPR. 

c. Reference Ballasts 

In the December 2011 TP NOPR, DOE 

proposed to adopt the reference ballast 

requirements of ANSI C78.389 for HID 

lamp testing. Based on a review of 

industry literature, communication with 

independent testing laboratories, and 

comments from industry, DOE 

determined that reference ballasts are 

readily available and that their use is 

likely to provide repeatable and 

consistent measurements. 76 FR 77914, 

77920 (Dec. 15, 2011). In this SNOPR, 

DOE addresses several comments and 

questions received in response to the 

December 2011 TP NOPR regarding: (1) 

Lamps for electronic ballasts only; (2) 

self-ballasted lamps; (3) multi-start type 

ballasts; and (4) effects of lamp 

orientation (position) on reference 

ballasts. Each of these items is discussed 

herein. 

i. Lamps for Electronic Ballasts Only 

In a written comment, the CA IOUs 

suggested that DOE develop reference 

specifications for lamps that can operate 

only on electronic ballasts. (CA IOUs, 

No. 8 at p. 3) During the January 2012 

TP public meeting, GE commented that 

HID lamps currently designed to operate 

only on electronic ballasts do not have 

reference ballasts. (GE, Public Meeting 

Transcript, No. 5 at p. 63) NEMA 

encouraged DOE not to attempt to 

define reference ballasts where they do 

not exist because of potential conflicts 

with ongoing industry efforts. NEMA 

also stated that lamps for which there 

are no ANSI standard ballasts should be 

measured in accordance with the 

manufacturer’s guidance. (NEMA, No. 6 

at p. 8) 

DOE acknowledges that currently 

there are no reference ballasts for lamps 

operating only with electronic ballasts. 

HID lamps operating only with 

electronic ballasts are a new and 

emerging technology and represent an 

insignificant portion of the market. 

Current manufacturer guidance for 

testing these types of lamps is 

inconsistent or incomplete, and the 

industry has not yet developed standard 

testing guidance. Therefore, in this 

SNOPR DOE does not propose test 

procedures for lamps that only can be 

operated with electronic ballasts. 

ii. Self-Ballasted Lamps and Reference 

Ballasts 

During the January 2012 TP public 

meeting, GE commented that selfballasted lamps do not have reference 

ballasts. (GE, Public Meeting Transcript, 

No. 5 at p. 63). In the December 2011 

TP NOPR, DOE did not require 

reference ballasts for self-ballasted HID 

lamps. DOE further notes that in the 

April 2013 HID lamps ECS Interim 

Analysis public meeting, DOE is not 

considering standards for self-ballasted 

HID lamps (Docket No. EERE–2010–BT– 

STD–0043, DOE, Public Meeting 

Transcript, No. 23, at p. 18). Therefore, 

DOE is not proposing test procedures for 

self-ballasted HID lamps. 

iii. Reference Ballasts for Multi-Start 

Type Metal Halide Lamps 

During the January 2012 TP public 

meeting, the CA IOUs questioned 

whether the December 2011 TP NOPR 

provided enough guidance for testing 

multi-start type HID lamps that can 

operate on multiple ballast types (e.g., 

pulse-start or probe-start). (CA IOUs, 

Public Meeting Transcript, No. 5 at p. 

69–70). OSRAM SYLVANIA explained 

that the lamp type indicates usage. For 

example, a pulse-start MH lamp 

designed as a direct replacement for 

probe-start lamps may have a reference 

ballast with probe-start characteristics. 

(OSRAM SYLVANIA, Public Meeting 

Transcript, No. 5 at p. 70) In this 

SNOPR, DOE provides clarification on 

reference ballast characteristics for 

multi-start type MH lamps. 

DOE reviewed manufacturer catalog 

data sheets and found that 

manufacturers of multi-start type MH 

lamps identify the ANSI lamp 

designations that the lamps have been 

designed to replace (e.g., M58, M138, 

M153, C184). ANSI lamp designation 

data sheets include the characteristics of 

reference ballasts to be used with the 

specific lamp (i.e., rated input voltage, 

reference current, and impedance). 

DOE also reviewed independent 

testing of multi-start type MH lamps 

conducted by the California Lighting 

Technology Center (CLTC), which 

directly compared the measured 

performance of ten 205-watt multi-start 

type MH lamps operated by a pulse-start 

ballast (for lamps designated M153) and 

ten 205-watt multi-start type MH lamps 

operated by a probe-start ballast (for 

lamps designated M58). The results of 

CLTC testing indicated that, for pulsestart operation, the mean values for 

lamp power and light output were 7 

percent and 6 percent higher, 

respectively, than for probe-start 

operation. The mean value for lamp 

efficacy for pulse-start operation was 

within 1 percent of that for probe-start 

operation (see Table II.3).12

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS3

29640 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 99 / Thursday, May 22, 2014 / Proposed Rules 

Advantage CDM lamps with AllStartTM Technology. 

June 2011. Sacramento, CA. http://cltc.ucdavis.edu/ 

sites/default/files/files/publication/20110600-pierphilips-hid-lamp-test.pdf. 

13Probe-start represents the majority of MH lamp 

shipments in 2008, and then starts to decline. Based 

on NEMA’s historical lamp shipments, the DOE 

shipments model estimates that the installed stock 

of probe-start MH systems remain in the majority 

in 2017. See sections 10.2.1 and 10.3.1.3 of chapter 

10 (shipments) of the HID ECS interim analysis TSD 

at: http://www.regulations.gov/#!documentDetail;

D=EERE-2010-BT-STD-0043-0016. 

14The relative spectral throughput of an 

integrating sphere is the ratio of the spectral 

irradiance on the detector port of the sphere by a 

reference light source and the spectral irradiance of 

the same source measured outside the integrating 

sphere. 

TABLE II.3—COMPARISON OF 205-W MULTI-START LAMP OPERATED ON BOTH A PROBE-START AND PULSE-START

BALLAST

Operating type ballast Light output 

lumens 

Lamp power 

watts 

Lamp efficacy 

lm/W 

Pulse-Start Ballast ....................................................................................................................... 21,524 221 97 

Probe-Start Ballast ....................................................................................................................... 20,344 207 98 

CLTC’s limited testing of multi-start 

type lamps suggests that these lamps 

provide nearly identical efficacy with 

probe-start and pulse-start operation. 

However, DOE recognizes that clear 

guidance is needed for selecting 

reference ballast characteristics from 

multiple compatible ANSI lamp 

designations. In this SNOPR, DOE 

proposes that multi-start type HID 

lamps be tested using the characteristics 

for a compatible probe-start ballast. DOE 

proposes that the probe-start ANSI lamp 

designation data sheets be the primary 

source of reference ballast 

characteristics used for testing multistart type HID lamps, due to the greater 

prevalence of existing probe-start MH 

systems.13 Given that multi-start type 

MH lamps are primarily intended for 

use in existing systems, DOE believes 

that probe-start operation is most 

representative of actual operation for 

multi-start type MH lamps. 

Most of the ANSI lamp designation 

codes referenced in the manufacturer 

literature for multi-start type MH lamps 

are included in ANSI C78.43–2013, 

‘‘ANSI Standard for Electric Lamps: 

Single-Ended Metal Halide Lamps.’’ 

These lamp designations (e.g., M58, 

M138, M165, C185) are assigned 

sequentially, with lower numbers 

indicating older lamp types. DOE 

proposes that multi-start type MH lamps 

be tested on a reference ballast 

compatible with a probe-start ANSI 

lamp designation with the lowest ANSI 

lamp designation. DOE believes this 

proposed approach best encompasses 

and represents actual operation on a 

variety of older and newer probe-start 

ballast types. If no probe-start ANSI 

lamp designation is listed by the 

manufacturer, DOE proposes the lamps 

be tested on a reference ballast with 

characteristics of the lowest ANSI lamp 

designation listed. For example, if a 

lamp is advertised as a multi-start type 

lamp, but the catalog or data sheet only 

lists compatible ballast codes of M128, 

M135, and M172 (all pulse-start 

ballasts), the lamp would be tested with 

a reference ballast with characteristics 

matching M128 (the lowest code listed). 

In summary, DOE proposes in this 

SNOPR that the multi-start type MH 

lamps be tested on a reference ballast 

with the characteristics defined in the 

equivalent probe-start ANSI lamp 

designation as listed in the lamp catalog 

or manufacturer data sheets with the 

lowest ANSI lamp designation. If no 

probe-start ANSI lamp designation is 

listed by the manufacturer, DOE then 

proposes that the lamp be tested on a 

reference ballast with the characteristics 

defined in the lowest ANSI lamp 

designation listed. 

iv. Lamp Orientation and Reference 

Ballasts 

The CA IOUs commented that it was 

unclear in ANSI C82.5 whether lamp 

orientation had any bearing on the 

selection of reference ballasts. (CA 

IOUs, Public Meeting Transcript, No. 5 

at p. 72) Philips noted that lamp 

orientation does not affect the choice of 

reference ballast to be used since the 

lamp operating position does not change 

the HID lamp wattage. (Philips, Public 

Meeting Transcript, No. 5 at p. 74) The 

electrical properties of the lamp are 

intrinsic to the lamp; as a result, they 

should not differ based on lamp 

orientation. Because lamp orientation 

does not affect lamp wattage, DOE does 

not propose to specify lamp orientation 

for the selection of reference ballasts. 

d. Instrumentation 

In the December 2011 TP NOPR, DOE 

proposed to adopt the electrical and 

photometric instrumentation 

requirements of ANSI C78.389 and LM– 

51, respectively, for its HID lamp test 

procedures. 76 FR 77914, 77920 (Dec. 

15, 2011). The instruments proposed for 

electrical measurements are described 

in ANSI C78.389, section 3.8. DOE 

received no comments on these 

requirements, and they are unaffected 

by this SNOPR. The instruments 

proposed for photometric instruments 

are described in LM–51–13, section 7.0, 

which includes the same instruments 

described in LM–51–00, section 9.0, as 

referenced in the December 2011 TP 

NOPR. The proposed instrumentation 

requirements for photometric 

measurements are detailed in the 

following sections. 

In the December 2011 TP NOPR, DOE 

proposed that the photometer have a 

relative spectral responsivity that 

approximates that of the human eye 

(i.e., the V-lambda (V(l)) function). 76 

FR 77914, 77920 (Dec. 15, 2011). DOE 

proposed to allow the use of either an 

integrating sphere or a goniophotometer 

for the photometric measurements. Id. 

DOE further proposed that photometric 

measurements of color characteristics be 

specified in terms of the CIE colorimetry 

system and CRI. Id. 

As described in the following 

paragraphs, DOE proposes additional 

specificity for these measurements in 

this SNOPR, and proposes to allow only 

the use of an integrating sphere for the 

photometric measurements. DOE also 

clarifies, as discussed further in section 

II.D.3, that CRI is being considered in 

the HID lamps ECS rulemaking (Docket 

No. EERE–2010–BT–STD–0043) only to 

define the CRI above which standards 

will not be considered for HID lamps. 

(Docket No. EERE–2010–BT–STD–0043, 

DOE, Public Meeting Transcript, No. 23 

at pp. 15–18) 

i. Integrating Sphere 

For integrating sphere measurements, 

DOE stated in the December 2011 TP 

NOPR that the spectral responsivity 

would take into account the relative 

spectral throughput of the sphere and 

detector spectral responsivity.14 76 FR 

77914, 77920 (Dec. 15, 2011). DOE also 

stated that the detector used in an 

integrating sphere measurement must 

have a wide field of view 

(approximating a cosine response) to 

maximize the sampled area of the 

sphere wall during measurement. Id. If 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS3

Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 99 / Thursday, May 22, 2014 / Proposed Rules 29641 

15A t-test is used to determine if two sample 

groups from the same population are ‘‘statistically’’ 

different, e.g., variability of distribution about the 

sample mean. The t-test evaluates this statistical 

difference by calculating the ratio of sample group 

mean difference to group variance. This ratio is 

analogous to a signal to noise ratio: The higher the 

ratio, the less likely it is that the difference between 

the two groups is random. 

16The characteristic value represents the 

individual observations within a sample. 

a diffuser is used on the detector, DOE 

proposed that its surface would need to 

be mounted flush with the sphere wall. 

Id. 

DOE also proposed that an integrating 

sphere for luminous flux measurements 

must be large enough to allow the 

sphere’s interior temperature to reach 

thermal equilibrium at the specified 

ambient temperature and to permit the 

internal baffle(s) to be small relative to 

the size of the integrating sphere. 76 FR 

77914, 77920 (Dec. 15, 2011). 

GE commented that NEMA members 

needed more detailed specifications for 

the integrating sphere diameter, and 

suggested that CIE standards might 

provide guidance. (GE, Public Meeting 

Transcript, No. 5 at p. 77) NEMA stated 

that it accepted DOE instrumentation 

requirements in principle, but requested 

more detailed guidance on integrating 

sphere diameter, suggesting that DOE 

reference IES LM–78–07, ‘‘IESNA 

Approved Method for Total Luminous 

Flux Measurement of Lamps Using an 

Integrating Sphere Photometer.’’ 

(NEMA, No. 6 at pp. 8–9) DOE reviewed 

LM–78 and notes that sections 3.1, 

‘‘Size of the Sphere,’’ and 6.3, ‘‘Sources 

of Errors and Corrections,’’ provide 

detailed guidance on integrating sphere 

diameter. DOE also reviewed CIE 84, 

‘‘Measurement of Luminous Flux,’’ and 

determined that those sphere size 

specifications are already incorporated 

into LM–78. Therefore, DOE proposes 

that luminous flux be determined as 

specified in section 7.0 of IES LM–51– 

13 and, when using an integrating 

sphere, determined as specified in 

sections 3.1 and 6.3 of IES LM–78–07. 

ii. Goniophotometer 

In the December 2011 TP NOPR, DOE 

proposed that for measurements using a 

goniophotometer, the detector required 

for intensity distribution would have a 

cosine response. 76 FR 77914, 77920 

(Dec. 15, 2011). DOE did not receive any 

comments related to the use of 

goniophotometers in response to the 

2011 TP NOPR. Because directional HID 

lamps are not covered in this SNOPR 

(see section II.C.3), DOE is revising its 

proposed test procedures to omit 

intensity measurements for directional 

lamps. Upon review of measurement 

correlation, testing burden, and relative 

incidence of use between 

goniophotometers and integrating 

spheres, DOE also proposes using an 

integrated sphere, rather than a 

goniometer system, to carry out all 

photometric measurements of HID 

lamps. 

While DOE recognizes that the 

integrating sphere and goniophotometer 

(a goniometer fitted with a photometer 

as the light detector) are both valid 

means of photometric measurement, 

DOE is concerned about the potential 

for a difference in the measured values. 

A test procedure that yields more than 

one possible value depending on 

instrumentation presents problems for 

certification and enforcement. If DOE 

and the manufacturer use different test 

methods, DOE could find that a lamp 

certified as compliant could be tested as 

non-compliant during a verification or 

enforcement proceeding. IES LM–51–13 

does not explicitly specify the scanning 

resolution (i.e., quantity and location of 

measurements around the lamp). DOE 

also determined that further 

specification of the goniophotometer 

method is unreasonable, because the 

scanning resolution specification would 

need to be adequate for the lamp that 

requires the finest resolution. This 

would likely present an overly 

burdensome test method for many other 

lamps that could be measured at a lower 

resolution. In contrast, use of an 

integrating sphere enables photometric 

characteristics of the HID lamp to be 

determined with a single measurement. 

Therefore, integrating spheres are the 

preferred method for photometric 

measurement due to the reduction in 

time required for testing. 

In consideration of the lack of 

measurement correlation between 

goniophotometers and integrating 

spheres and the reduced burden and 

much higher incidence of use of 

integrating spheres, DOE proposes in 

the SNOPR to require all photometric 

measurements for HID lamps to be 

carried out in an integrating sphere and 

that goniometer systems must not be 

used. DOE invites interested parties to 

comment on the proposal to require all 

photometric values be measured by an 

integrating sphere (via photometer or 

spectroradiometer). 

2. Lamp Selection and Setup 

a. Basic Model 

In the December 2011 TP NOPR, DOE 

proposed test procedures for HID lamp 

testing to determine the energy 

efficiency characteristics of each basic 

model. 76 FR 77914, 77921 (Dec. 15, 

2011). As discussed in section III.A.3 of 

the December 2011 TP NOPR, a ‘‘basic 

model’’ is a group of lamp models that 

are essentially identical in design and 

performance. Id. The revised definition 

of ‘‘basic model’’ proposed in today’s 

SNOPR does not change these relevant 

aspects. The performance characteristics 

proposed to be measured (e.g., lumen 

output, power, and CCT) must be 

similar for all of the lamps represented 

by a basic model. 76 FR 77914, 77918 

(Dec. 15, 2011). 

b. Sampling Plans 

In the December 2011 TP NOPR, DOE 

proposed a HID lamp sampling method 

similar to that used for GSFL/GSIL/IRL 

at 10 CFR 429.27(a)(2)(i)–(ii), as follows. 

For each basic model of HID lamps, 

samples of production lamps from a 

minimum sample size of 21 lamps are 

to be tested, and the results for all 

samples are to be averaged over a 

consecutive 12-month period. The 

manufacturer is to randomly select a 

minimum of three lamps from each 

month of production for a minimum of 

7 months out of the 12-month period. If 

production occurs during fewer than 7 

of the 12 months, the manufacturer is to 

randomly select three or more lamps 

from each month of production, and the 

number of lamps selected for each 

month is to be distributed as evenly as 

practicable among the months of 

production to obtain a minimum sample 

of 21 lamps. Due to inherent uncertainty 

in any sample measurement, the 

confidence limit is set to 95 percent 

based on the sample’s statistical t-test.15

Any represented characteristic value of 

a basic model is to be based on this 

sample, and this characteristic value is 

to be no greater than the lower of: 

(A) The mean of the sample, 

Where: 

and x ̄ is the sample mean,16

n is the number of samples, and 

xi is the ith sample; 

Or, 

(B) The lower 95-percent confidence 

limit of the characteristic value true 

mean divided by 0.97, 

Where: 

and x ̄ is the sample mean, 

s is the sample standard deviation, 

n is the number of samples, and 

t0.95 is the t statistic for a 95-percent onetailed confidence interval with n-1 


mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS3EP22MY14.000</GPH> EP22MY14.001</GPH>
29642 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 99 / Thursday, May 22, 2014 / Proposed Rules 

degrees of freedom (from statistical 

tables). 

76 FR 77914, 77921 (Dec. 15, 2011). 

In the paragraphs that follow, DOE 

discusses its proposals in the December 

2011 TP NOPR for sample size, 

statistical representation, and the 

divisor. DOE proposes changes to the 

sampling rate and lower confidence 

limit (LCL) as a result of comments 

received on the December 2011 TP 

NOPR. 

i. Sample Size 

In formulating the proposed sampling 

plan requirements, DOE reviewed 

sample size requirements for European 

Union (EU) testing and sample size 

requirements for other HID and 

fluorescent lighting technologies, as 

well as US testing and sample size 

regulations for other lighting 

technologies. 

EU sample size requirements are set 

forth in Commission Regulation (EC) 

No. 245, published in the Official 

Journal of the European Union in 2009 

(herein referred to as Commission 

Regulation (EC) No. 245/2009). This 

document includes both energy 

efficiency standards and testing 

requirements for fluorescent and HID 

lamps. Annex IV of the regulation 

defines the sample size for all lamps as 

a total of 20 lamps of the same model 

and from the same manufacturer, 

randomly selected. The sample must be 

considered to comply with the 

regulation if the average results of the 

sample do not vary from the limit, 

threshold, or declared values by more 

than 10 percent. 

DOE surveyed the sample size for 

other covered lamps. Table II.4 

compares the sample size for each of the 

covered lamps and the different metrics 

that are tested. 

TABLE II.4—COMPARISON OF SAMPLE SIZE FOR COVERED LAMPS

CFR citation Lamp type Metric Sample size 

10 CFR 429.27 ......................... General service incandescent and fluorescent 

lamps.

Lamp efficacy .......................................... ≥21 

CRI.

Watts input.

Lumens.

General service incandescent lamps ...................... Watts input .............................................. ≥21 

CRI.

Lumen.

Rated lifetime.

Incandescent reflector lamps .................................. Lamp efficacy .......................................... ≥21 

10 CFR 429.35 ......................... Medium-base compact fluorescent lamps .............. Efficacy .................................................... ≥5 

1,000-hour lumen maintenance .............. ≥5 

Lumen maintenance ............................... ≥5 

Rapid-cycle stress test ............................ ≥6 

Average rated lamp life ........................... ≥10 

10 CFR 429.40 ......................... Candelabra base and intermediate base incandescent lamps.Lamp wattage ......................................... ≥21 

Based on its review of sample size 

requirements, DOE proposed in the 

December 2011 TP NOPR to use a 

sample size of 21 for HID lamps. 76 FR 

77914, 77921 (Dec. 15, 2011). NEMA 

stated that a sample size of 21 lamps is 

not appropriate for HID lamps because 

of the significant capital investment and 

electricity costs for long-term lumen 

maintenance testing, and that having to 

test 21 samples of numerous basic 

models (200 basic models by Philips’ 

estimate) would further compound 

these costs. NEMA provided best and 

worst case cost estimates of $150,000 to 

$450,000 for testing the DOE proposed 

21 samples for 50 basic models—this 

cost range is for both initial efficacy 

measurements and lumen maintenance 

measurements. (NEMA, No. 6 at p. 10) 

NEMA noted that lamp production can 

be interrupted based on changing 

demand, which could compel 

manufacturers to sample as many as 21 

lamps from a first production run, as 

well as lamps from any additional runs 

within a 12-month reporting period. 

NEMA stated that because of demand 

fluctuations for certain lamps, some 

lamps may not have continuous (or 

multiple) production runs within the 

same calendar year. Therefore, 

manufacturers might test 21 lamps in 

the first production run to meet the 

proposed sample size requirement, in 

case future production runs of that lamp 

type did not occur in that year. NEMA 

suggested that, to meet DOE’s proposed 

monthly sampling rate requirements, 

manufacturers might then have to test 

another sample of three or more lamps 

later in that same year if customer 

demand required additional production 

runs. 

NEMA also raised the logistical 

concern of lumen maintenance testing, 

which NEMA stated requires many 

thousands of hours with staggered start 

times. (NEMA, No. 6 at p. 10) To 

mitigate this ongoing testing 

requirement, NEMA proposed an initial 

sample of 21 lamps for lumen 

maintenance testing with an additional 

2 lamps per production run sampled 

over the rest of the reporting year for 

100-hour confirmation testing. (NEMA, 

No. 6 at p. 10) In response to the 

February 2012 HID lamps ECS 

Framework document, Venture Lighting 

(Venture) supported a bifurcated 

approach of testing a large initial sample 

set for initial values and then using the 

same sample for lumen maintenance 

testing, performing supplemental 

efficacy testing with a smaller 

additional sample set(s). Venture also 

noted that NEMA’s working group for 

lamp statistics was still determining 

optimal sample sizes. (Docket No. 

EERE–2010–BT–STD–0043, Venture, 

Public Meeting Transcript, No. 6 at pp. 

167–168) 

DOE reviewed NEMA’s concerns 

regarding sample size, which can be 

categorized as follows: (1) Sampling 

rate; (2) sample size required for lamp 

efficacy, CCT, and CRI testing; and (3) 

sample size required for lumen 

maintenance testing. DOE notes it has 

withdrawn the proposal to establish a 

test method for lumen maintenance and 

has withdrawn the proposal to establish 

a sampling plan for CRI measurements. 

However, DOE’s review includes those 

elements because NEMA based their 

concerns, cost scenarios, and examples 

on their inclusion in the testing 

requirements. 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS3

Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 99 / Thursday, May 22, 2014 / Proposed Rules 29643 

Sampling Rate 

In the December 2011 TP NOPR, DOE 

proposed a sampling rate of three lamps 

per month for a minimum of 7 months 

in a given reporting year. 76 FR 77914, 

77921 (Dec. 15, 2011). NEMA proposed 

a sampling rate based on production 

runs, but did not define a production 

run. Based on its review of business 

terminology, DOE understands a 

production run to be a group of similar 

or related equipment produced using 

particular manufacturing procedures, 

processes, or conditions. Production run 

size will depend on customer demand 

for lamps produced, as well as the costs 

to set up production and carry excess 

inventory. This general description 

underscores some of the challenges 

manufacturers might face in balancing 

costs and inventory with changes in 

customer demand and challenges for 

DOE to administer regulations based on 

production runs. 

DOE surveyed the sampling rate for 

other covered lamps. Table II.5 

compares the sample size and sampling 

rate for each of the covered lamps and 

related metrics. 

TABLE II.5—COMPARISON OF SAMPLE SIZE AND SAMPLING RATE FOR COVERED LAMPS

CFR citation Lamp type Metric Sample size 

10 CFR 429.27 .......... General service incandescent and fluorescent lamps.Lamp efficacy ......................................

CRI ......................................................

Watts input ..........................................

Lumens ................................................

Randomly select three lamps from 

each month of production for a minimum of 7 months. 

General service incandescent lamps .. Watts input ..........................................

CRI ......................................................

Lumen ..................................................

Rated lifetime ......................................

Randomly select three lamps from 

each month of production for a minimum of 7 months. 

Incandescent reflector lamps .............. Lamp efficacy ...................................... Randomly select three lamps from 

each month of production for a minimum of 7 months. 

10 CFR 429.35 .......... Medium-base compact fluorescent 

lamps.

Efficacy ................................................

1,000-hour lumen maintenance ..........

Lumen maintenance ............................

Randomly selected. 

Rapid-cycle stress test ........................

Average rated lamp life .......................

None specified. 

None specified. 

10 CFR 429.40 .......... Candelabra base and intermediate 

base incandescent lamps.

Lamp wattage ...................................... Randomly selected. 

In its comments on the December 

2011 TP NOPR, NEMA expressed 

concern about different sample size 

requirements in the United States and 

Europe, and expressed its desire to use 

existing testing data for domestic and 

international reporting where possible. 

(NEMA, Public Meeting Transcript, No. 

5 at pp. 43, 79–80) Commission 

Regulation (EC) No. 245/2009 requires a 

minimum sample size of 20 HID lamps, 

but does not specify the frequency or 

rate at which the 20 lamps are to be 

sampled during a reporting year. 

LSD 63–2012 recommends a sampling 

plan for lamps not regulated (as of the 

year 2012) in the Code of Federal 

Regulations, stating that the samples 

must be ‘‘randomly selected from at 

least four different manufacturing dates. 

If the manufacturing dates of the 

samples are not available, the samples 

are recommended to be procured from 

at least four different locations.’’ As 

discussed previously, HID lamp 

production may be intermittent based 

on demand, with fewer than four 

manufacturing dates within a calendar 

year. Production may also be limited to 

fewer than four different manufacturing 

locations, depending on the 

manufacturer. Therefore, DOE does not 

propose adoption of the sampling rate 

requirements of LSD 63–2012. 

Because of the fluctuating demand for 

certain HID lamp types and the 

challenge of defining production runs 

for this equipment, DOE proposes a 

sampling rate requirement for HID 

lamps that allows random selection. 

This is consistent with the sampling rate 

requirements of the EU, as well as for 

some other covered lamp types, and 

would allow manufacturer discretion in 

sampling rate, e.g., a single sampling 

event or multiple sampling events. 

Sample Size Required for Lamp Efficacy 

and Correlated Color Temperature, 

Testing 

DOE originally proposed a total 

sample size of 21 lamps in the 

December 2011 TP NOPR. 76 FR 77914, 

77921 (Dec. 15, 2011). NEMA objected 

to the proposed sample size, citing 

potentially prohibitive electricity costs 

and capital investment for testing 

facilities (particularly for lumen 

maintenance testing). (NEMA, No. 6 at 

p. 10) 

The LSD 63–2012 recommended 

sampling plan for lamps not covered in 

the Code of Federal Regulations states, 

‘‘The minimum sample size for 

verification testing of lamps shall be 21 

samples randomly selected from at least 

four different manufacturing dates. If 

the manufacturing dates of the samples 

are not available, the samples are 

recommended to be procured from at 

least four different locations.’’ Thus, 

NEMA’s LSD 63–2012 supports DOE’s 

original proposed sample size of 21. 

DOE understands that electricity costs 

are a component of testing burden, and 

are affected by sample size. (Testing 

burden for HID lamps is discussed in 

section III.B of this SNOPR.) DOE notes 

that it no longer proposes lumen 

maintenance testing for potential energy 

conservation standards for HID lamps. 

Because DOE no longer proposes testing 

for lumen maintenance, NEMA’s 

comment related to testing burden over 

a subsequent period of time is moot. 

DOE proposed a sample size of 21 

lamps for CCT testing in the December 

2011 TP NOPR. 76 FR 77914, 77921 

(Dec. 15, 2011). DOE received no 

comments supporting or opposing this 

proposal. DOE proposes that the sample 

size for CCT be the same as it is for lamp 

efficacy for potential energy 

conservation standards. Therefore, DOE 

proposes a minimum sample size of 21 

for CCT for potential energy 

conservation standards. 

In this SNOPR, DOE does not propose 

a sample size requirement for CRI 

because CRI is being considered in the 

standards rulemaking only to define an 

exemption for lamps. 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS3

29644 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 99 / Thursday, May 22, 2014 / Proposed Rules 

17 ‘‘True mean’’ is the population mean of all 

manufacturer-produced lamps. This characterizes 

the mean (average) value of all lamps of the same 

basic model produced by the manufacturer. In 

contrast, the sample mean refers to the mean 

(average) of the sample set and the sample size is 

defined accordingly in the proposed rule. 

Review of Sample Sizes 

In review, for the HID lamps that have 

the potential to be subject to future 

energy conservation standards, DOE 

proposes the sample sizes shown in 

Table II.6. 

TABLE II.6—DOE PROPOSED SAMPLE

SIZES

Measurement/calculation Minimum number 

of samples 

Lamp Efficacy ................... 21 

Correlated Color Temperature ................................ 21 

ii. Statistical Representation 

In the December 2011 TP NOPR, DOE 

proposed that any represented value of 

lamp efficacy or color characteristics for 

a basic model be based on a sample of 

21 lamps and be less than or equal to 

the lower of either the sample mean or 

the LCL of the characteristic value true 

mean 17 divided by 0.97. 76 FR 77914, 

77921 (Dec. 15, 2011). NEMA 

commented that DOE’s proposed 

statistical approach is an application of 

the statistical t-test that results in more 

stringent tolerances than EU 

requirements, and could unnecessarily 

put U.S. manufacturers at a competitive 

disadvantage in the EU marketplace. 

(NEMA, No. 6 at p. 9) 

DOE reviewed its application of the ttest and interprets NEMA’s concerns 

about application of the t-test as 

applying to instances where the sample 

mean is less than the quotient of the 

LCL and divisor (currently set at 0.97). 

DOE recognizes that in the absence of a 

divisor, the LCL of a sample will always 

be lower than the sample mean. 

However, as the divisor decreases from 

1.00 to 0, the resulting quotient (LCL 

divided by the divisor) can be greater 

than the sample mean. Based on this 

calculation, DOE proposed in the 

December 2011 TP NOPR that any 

represented characteristic value be the 

lower of either (1) the sample mean or 

(2) the LCL of the characteristic value 

true mean divided by the divisor. 76 FR 

77914, 77921 (Dec. 15, 2011). 

The EU requires the average (mean) of 

the sample to be within 10 percent of 

the limit, threshold, or declared values. 

Under EU requirements, a significant 

portion of the sample could be less than 

the declared (or required standard) 

value and still be considered compliant 

because mean values can be skewed by 

outliers or extreme values. In contrast, 

DOE proposed in the December 2011 TP 

NOPR to use the confidence interval of 

95 percent to calculate the LCL, which 

approximates the proportion of a sample 

that may be expected to contain the true 

mean. 76 FR 77914, 77921 (Dec. 15, 

2011). To better represent differences in 

manufacturing variability between HID 

lamp types, DOE revises its proposed 

confidence intervals in this SNOPR (as 

discussed in section II.C.2.b.iii). 

NEMA also commented that the 

sample mean calculation does not 

provide tolerance for manufacturing and 

measurement uncertainties. NEMA 

stated that there is inherent variation in 

HID lamp manufacturing and 

measurement uncertainties across 

different National Voluntary Laboratory 

Accreditation Program (NVLAP)- 

accredited laboratories. (NEMA, No. 6 at 

p. 9) 

DOE acknowledges that there are 

uncertainties related to both lamp 

manufacturing and testing. DOE 

addressed this issue previously in the 

May 1997 fluorescent and incandescent 

lamp test procedures rulemaking (herein 

referred to as the May 1997 FL/IL TP 

final rule). 62 FR 29222 (May 29, 1997). 

During the rulemaking process for the 

May 1997 FL/IL TP final rule, NEMA 

and other manufacturers proposed 

different derating values for both the 

sample mean and the LCL. 62 FR 29222, 

29230 (May 29, 1997). DOE, NEMA, and 

NIST met during the rulemaking process 

to discuss the sampling plan, variability, 

and uncertainties. 62 FR 29222, 29230 

(May 29, 1997). In the May 1997 FL/IL 

TP final rule, DOE stated that all 

variability was accounted for by the 

confidence limit equation using the ‘‘ttest’’ and the derating factor (divisor) 

applied only to the LCL, and not to the 

mean. 62 FR 29222, 29230 (May 29, 

1997). 

The LCL is a function of the sample 

mean and encompasses manufacturing 

variations. Historically, DOE has not 

applied the divisor to the sample mean 

lumen per watt value. Id. at 29229–30. 

However, sample mean lumen per watt 

is not derated because the NIST 

uncertainty in the lumen output of the 

standard lamps is randomly distributed. 

Id. at 29230, DOE based its December 

2011 TP NOPR proposal on the method 

adopted in the May 1997 FL/IL TP final 

rule and applied the divisor only to the 

LCL and not to the mean. This proposal 

is unchanged in today’s SNOPR. 

iii. Lower Confidence Limit 

In the December 2011 TP NOPR, DOE 

proposed a confidence interval of 95 

percent to calculate the LCL, which 

reflects the inherent uncertainty in any 

sample measurement resulting from 

manufacturing variations. This proposal 

included the same certification 

requirements that were used in 10 CFR 

429.27 for GSFLs (a related gasdischarge lamp). Based on comments 

received and additional research, DOE 

proposes in this SNOPR to specify two 

separate confidence intervals applicable 

to: (1) MH lamps; and (2) MV and HPS 

lamps. 

In response to the December 2011 TP 

NOPR, GE commented that the 

tolerances in DOE’s statistical approach 

should be modified because HID lamps 

have much wider manufacturing 

tolerances for lumen output than 

fluorescent and incandescent lamps. 

(GE, Public Meeting Transcript, No. 5 at 

p. 82) OSRAM SYLVANIA agreed, 

noting that it is difficult to report HID 

lamp lumen output beyond the nearest 

100 lumens. (OSRAM SYLVANIA, 

Public Meeting Transcript, No. 5 at pp. 

31–32). During the March 2012 ECS 

public meeting, Venture commented 

that the physical complexity of metal 

halide (e.g., containing 10 components 

as opposed to 1–2 components for other 

lamp types) contributes to 

manufacturing variation. (Docket No. 

EERE–2010–BT–STD–0043, Venture, 

Public Meeting Transcript, No. 8 at p. 

91) 

NEMA provides long-term 

manufacturing data variability as a ratio 

of the observed long term standard 

deviation (sLT) compared to the mean (m) 

(written as sLT/m) in LSD 63–2012 based 

on industry consensus for many lamp 

and ballast types, including HID lamps. 

Table II.7 provides an excerpt of the 

incandescent, fluorescent, and HID 

variability values from LSD 63–2012. 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS3

Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 99 / Thursday, May 22, 2014 / Proposed Rules 29645 

18 DOE calculated the t-statistics for confidence 

intervals from 90% to 99% in increments of 0.5% 

(90%, 90.5%, 91%, etc.). DOE then scaled the tstatistic based on the ratio of the long term 

manufacturing variability for the different light 

sources from LSD–63. DOE then found the 

confidence interval that corresponded with scaled 

t-statistic. 

TABLE II.7—INDUSTRY CONSENSUS LONG-TERM MANUFACTURING DATA VARIABILITY (SLT/μ) 

Lamp type Luminous 

flux 

Lamp 

efficacy CRI CCT 

Tungsten filament lamp ................................................................................................... 0.040 0.047 0.030 

Medium-base CFL ........................................................................................................... 0.060 0.096 0.040 0.045 

Double-based fluorescent lamp ....................................................................................... 0.050 0.056 0.040 0.025 

Pulse-start quartz metal halide lamp ............................................................................... 0.070 0.070 0.045 0.065 

Pulse-start ceramic metal halide lamp ............................................................................ 0.065 0.065 0.040 0.050 

High-pressure sodium lamp ............................................................................................. 0.040 0.040 0.020 0.025 

There is significant variability in 

luminous flux for HID lamps, with 

pulse-start quartz MH lamps showing 

the highest variability for all HID lamp 

types discussed in LSD 63–2012. LSD 

63–2012 does not provide variability 

values for MV lamps, but DOE believes 

these values would be comparable to 

those of HPS lamps because MV lamps 

have similar, comparatively simple 

lamp chemistry. Because HID lamps are 

measured at a fixed power value (per 

LM–51–13), this variation in lumens 

correlates to the same variation in lamp 

efficacy. 

DOE agrees with the findings of LSD 

63–2012, which indicate less 

manufacturing variability for HPS lamps 

than for MH lamps. Due to the 

difference in inherent uncertainty in a 

typical sample of each of the different 

HID lamp types, DOE proposes to set the 

confidence intervals differently for MH 

versus HPS and MV lamps. Based on 

LSD 63–2012, MH lamps have more 

manufacturing variation than GSFLs, 

while HPS (and by association MV 

lamps) have less variation than GSFLs. 

Using these values, DOE calculated 

confidence intervals so that the values 

of the LCL divided by the sample mean 

for all HID lamps types are consistent 

with those values used in test 

procedures for GSFLs.18 74 FR 31829, 

31836 (July 6, 2009) Therefore, to 

calculate the LCL, DOE proposes in this 

SNOPR to specify a confidence interval 

of 99 percent for MV and HPS lamps 

and a confidence interval of 90 percent 

for MH lamps. 

iv. Divisor 

In the December 2011 TP NOPR, DOE 

proposed that the LCL be divided by a 

divisor of 0.97, which translates to an 

expected variation of 3 percent. 76 FR 

77914, 77921 (Dec. 15, 2011). In written 

comments, NEMA stated that CRI and 

CCT should be given tolerances of 3 and 

4 percent, respectively. (NEMA, No. 6 at 

p. 3) NEMA also described a typical 4 

percent measurement variation between 

testing laboratories. (NEMA, Public 

Meeting Transcript, No. 5 at p. 102) 

DOE received no other comments 

related to the divisor. 

DOE uses various divisors for other 

covered light sources. General service 

fluorescent lamps (10 CFR 429.27) and 

general service incandescent lamps (10 

CFR 429.27) use a divisor of 0.97. In 

contrast, medium base CFLs (10 CFR 

429.35) and candelabra-base and 

intermediate-base incandescent lamps 

(10 CFR 429.40) use a divisor of 0.95. In 

the December 2011 TP NOPR, DOE 

proposed a divisor of 0.97 (76 FR 77914, 

77921 (Dec. 15, 2011)). In this SNOPR, 

DOE continues to propose a divisor of 

0.97 for all HID lamps. 

NEMA has commented on this topic 

in previous rulemakings. In its 

comments on the September 2010 CC&E 

NOPR, NEMA provided a formula for 

calculating divisors: 

where ‘‘t’’ is a function of the specified 

confidence limit, ‘‘n’’ is the sample size, 

‘‘s’’ is the standard deviation, and ‘‘m’’ 

is the true mean, as well as a table of 

divisors for different sample sizes and 

LCLs of 95 percent. NEMA also 

provided a table (Table II.8 is a reprint 

of the table provided by NEMA) 

showing different divisors for both 

different sample sizes and different 

ratios of standard of deviations to the 

mean. (Docket No. EERE–2010–BT–CE– 

0014, NEMA, No. 85 at pp. 38–39) 

TABLE II.8—NEMA’S DIVISORS FOR LOWER CONFIDENCE LIMIT

s/μ Ratio 

Minimum sample size 

4 5 6 10 21 

0.01 0.99 0.99 0.99 0.99 1.00 

0.02 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.99 0.99 

0.03 0.96 0.97 0.98 0.98 0.99 

0.04 0.95 0.96 0.97 0.98 0.98 

0.05 0.94 0.95 0.96 0.97 0.98 

0.10 0.88 0.90 0.92 0.94 0.96 

0.15 0.82 0.86 0.88 0.91 0.94 

0.20 0.76 0.81 0.84 0.88 0.92 

0.25 0.71 0.76 0.79 0.86 0.91 

0.30 0.68 0.71 0.75 0.83 0.89 

0.35 0.59 0.67 0.71 0.80 0.87 

0.40 0.53 0.62 0.67 0.77 0.85 


mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS3EP22MY14.008</GPH>
29646 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 99 / Thursday, May 22, 2014 / Proposed Rules 

19This is the same sample size and LCL divisor 

used for GSFL and GSIL lamps. 

20For example, if the lamp is to be operated in 

the base-down position, the lamp must be operated 

(‘‘burned in’’ or ‘‘aged’’) in that base-down position. 

21Lamp position is designated in the lamp 

designation (catalog code) and included in 

manufacturer catalogs, specification sheets, and the 

packaging. 

In the December 2011 TP NOPR, DOE 

proposed a sample size of 21 lamps and 

an LCL divisor of 0.97.19 76 FR 77914, 

77921 (Dec. 15, 2011). As shown in 

Table II.9, this corresponds to s/m ratios 

between 0.05 and 0.10. 

TABLE II.9—DIVISORS FOR VARYING LCLS WITH SAMPLE SIZE OF 21 LAMPS

s/μ Ratio 99% 97% 95% 

0.05 0.97 0.98 0.98 

0.10 0.95 0.96 0.96 

Finally, NEMA commented that 

NVLAP’s ‘‘Proficiency Testing for 

Energy Efficient Lighting Products’’ 

shows lab-to-lab variations of more than 

4 percent, depending on the lamp 

technology. (NEMA, No. 6 at p. 13) 

According to NEMA, the overall 

uncertainty for any lamp measurement 

will include variation of the measured 

characteristics. Therefore, for highly 

variable characteristics such as light 

output and color, the measurement 

uncertainty may be significantly greater 

than just the variation of the 

characteristic itself (which is typical for 

discharge lamps). (NEMA, No. 6 at p. 

13) In this SNOPR, DOE proposes to 

retain an LCL divisor of 0.97 for all HID 

lamps. 

v. Proposed Sampling Plan for Potential 

Energy Conservation Standards 

DOE proposes, for each basic model of 

HID lamp, randomly selected samples of 

production lamps shall be tested and 

the results averaged. A minimum of 21 

lamps shall be tested. Any represented 

value of lamp efficacy of a basic model 

shall be less than or equal to the lower 

of: 

(A) The mean of the sample, 

Where: 

x ̄ is the sample mean, 

n is the number of samples, and 

xi is the ith sample; 

Or, 

(B) The lower confidence limit (LCL) 

of the true mean divided by 0.97, 

Where: 

x ̄ is the sample mean, 

s is the sample standard deviation, 

n is the number of samples, and 

t is the t statistic for a 90-percent one-tailed 

confidence interval with n-1 degrees of 

freedom (from appendix A) for MH 

lamps, or the t statistic for a 99-percent 

one-tailed confidence interval with n-1 

degrees of freedom (from appendix A) for 

HPS and MV lamps. 

For each basic model of HID lamp, the 

CCT must be measured from the same 

lamps selected for the lamp efficacy 

measurements (i.e., the manufacturer 

must measure all lamps for lumens, 

input power, and CCT). The CCT must 

be represented as the mean of a 

minimum sample of 21 lamps, 

Where: 

x ̄ is the sample mean, 

n is the number of samples, and 

xi is the ith sample. 

c. Lamp Seasoning and Stabilization 

In the December 2011 TP NOPR, DOE 

proposed that lamps be seasoned (i.e., 

operated or aged) for at least 100 hours 

in the same orientation in which they 

will be used.20 76 FR 77914, 77921–22 

(Dec. 15, 2011). Standard lamp 

orientation (burning position) would be 

base-up unless otherwise designated by 

the manufacturer.21 Id. This is consistent 

with ANSI C78.389, section 3.7.2. 

NEMA supported this approach. 

(NEMA, No. 6 at p. 10). 

DOE received additional comments 

on testing orientation for lamps with no 

specified operating position. The CA 

IOUs and the Joint Comment suggested 

that DOE examine other testing 

orientations, but did not disagree that 

the lamps should be seasoned and 

stabilized in the testing orientation. (CA 

IOUs, No. 8 at pp. 2–3; Joint Comment, 

No. 9 at p. 2) Therefore, DOE proposes 

in this SNOPR to require that HID lamps 

with no specified operating position 

(including universal position lamps) be 

seasoned and stabilized in the position 

in which they will be tested (vertical 

base-up position as discussed in section 

II.C.1.c.iv). 

In the December 2011 TP NOPR, DOE 

also proposed a lamp stabilization 

method (warm-up and stabilization 

criteria) based on ANSI C78.389, section 

3.7. 76 FR 77914, 77922 (Dec. 15, 2011). 

NEMA concurred with using the 

stabilization criteria of ANSI C78.389 

for the HID lamp test procedures. 

(NEMA, No. 6 at p. 10) DOE received no 

other comments on its proposed 

approach. Therefore, the warm-up and 

stabilization criteria are unaffected by 

this SNOPR. 

d. Lamp/Circuit Transfer 

In the December 2011 TP NOPR, DOE 

proposed to adopt the lamp cool-down 

and re-stabilization methods of ANSI 

C78.389, section 3.7, for HID lamp test 

procedures. 76 FR 77914, 77922–23 

(Dec. 15, 2011). HID lamps are sensitive 

to movement once they are warmed up 

and stabilized. Therefore, any 

significant movement or disturbance 

could destabilize the lamp operation, 

altering its output or electrical 

characteristics and requiring the lamp to 

be re-stabilized prior to testing. The restabilization time varies by lamp type, 

whether the lamp arc has been 

extinguished, and whether lamp 

orientation has changed. Lamp cooldown, in contrast, is needed only when 

the lamp arc is extinguished prior to 

relocating the lamp in the integrating 

sphere. 

The lamp cool-down and restabilization requirements of ANSI 

C78.389, section 3.7, are shown in Table 

II.10. In the December 2011 TP NOPR, 

DOE proposed using the re-stabilization 

requirements in ANSI C78.389, rather 

than LM–51, because ANSI C78.389 

provides specific guidance for restabilization requirements for each of 

the HID lamp types, whereas LM–51 

provides only general guidance. 76 FR 

77914, 77922 (Dec. 15, 2011). DOE 

received no negative comments 

regarding its proposed requirements as 

they relate to lamps that are 

extinguished and/or changed in 

orientation prior to relocation. 


mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS3EP22MY14.002</GPH> EP22MY14.003</GPH> EP22MY14.004</GPH>
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 99 / Thursday, May 22, 2014 / Proposed Rules 29647 

TABLE II.10—ANSI C78.389 HID LAMP COOL-DOWN AND RE-STABILIZATION REQUIREMENTS

Lamp type Cooling requirement Re-Stabilization time 

MV ........................................ None ................................................................................ Not in standard. 

Reconfirm stabilized operations upon transfer/restrike. 

HPS ...................................... Allow to cool for 1 hour minimum before relocating ....... Not in standard. 

Reconfirm stabilized operations upon transfer/restrike. 

MH ........................................ Cool to below 60 °C if relocating .................................... No relocation no reorientation—30 minutes. 

Relocation with no reorientation—30 minutes. 

Reorientation—6 hours. 

During the January 2012 TP public 

meeting, OSRAM SYLVANIA explained 

an industry practice where HID lamps 

are energized, stabilized, and moved 

into the integrating sphere. There is no 

cool-down or re-stabilization because 

the lamps are not extinguished. 

(OSRAM SYLVANIA, Public Meeting 

Transcript, No. 5 at pp. 85–86) NEMA 

provided further details on how the 

lamps are moved into the integrating 

sphere while operating, and how 

stabilization is reconfirmed inside the 

sphere. (NEMA, No. 6 at p. 11) NEMA 

stated that this methodology is more 

efficient than extinguishing, cooling, 

and re-stabilizing the lamp. (NEMA, No. 

6 at p. 11) NEMA also stated that this 

method generally requires a maximum 

stabilization time of only 15 minutes. 

NEMA was concerned that DOE’s 

proposed cool-down and re-stabilization 

requirements would apply 

unnecessarily to lamps that remain 

operating with no change in orientation. 

(NEMA, No. 6 at p. 11) According to 

NEMA, ‘‘The table [Table II.10], as 

written seems to apply to lamps that are 

turned off before locating them in the 

sphere. This should not apply to the 

lamps that remain lighted with no 

change in orientation.’’ (NEMA, No. 6 at 

p.11) DOE understands that this 

methodology is an industry practice but 

is not documented in any industry 

standards. 

DOE agrees with NEMA’s distinction, 

and proposes that lamps that remain 

energized with no change in orientation 

when moved should be operated for the 

minimum time needed to verify lamp 

stabilization prior to measurements. If 

the lamps are changed in orientation 

and/or extinguished and then moved, 

DOE proposes to apply the cool-down 

and re-stabilization requirements from 

the NOPR (shown in Table II.10). 

e. Lamp Orientation 

In the December 2011 TP NOPR, DOE 

proposed to adopt the lamp orientation 

requirements of ANSI C78.389, section 

3.6, for HID lamp testing. 76 FR 77914, 

77923 (Dec. 15, 2011). As discussed 

herein, industry procedures have been 

developed to ensure that the correct 

orientation is maintained for consistent 

electrical and photometric 

measurements. 

ANSI C78.389, section 3.6, requires 

that a lamp marked or designated on the 

lamp’s data sheet for use in a specific 

operating position be tested in that 

position. If no operating position is 

specified or the lamp is marked 

‘‘universal,’’ this industry standard 

directs that the lamp is to be operated 

in the vertical base-up position. 

In contrast, LM–51 does not contain 

lamp orientation requirements for 

testing, except to note that lamp 

orientation during warm-up must be the 

same as that during photometry. LM–51 

also states that the manufacturer’s 

specifications should be consulted for 

any restrictions on lamp orientation. 

During the January 2012 TP public 

meeting, the CA IOUs asked whether 

HID lamps performed best in a vertical 

operating position. (CA IOUs, Public 

Meeting Transcript, No. 5 at pp. 89–90) 

OSRAM SYLVANIA stated that it 

measures lumen output for universal 

position lamps in horizontal and 

vertical orientations. (OSRAM 

SYLVANIA, Public Meeting Transcript, 

No. 5 at pp. 90–91) Manufacturers 

further elaborated that universal 

position lamps are often used in 

floodlights where the aiming angle is 

unknown, and it would be burdensome 

to test them in additional orientations. 

(OSRAM SYLVANIA, Public Meeting 

Transcript, No. 5 at pp. 91–93; GE, 

Public Meeting Transcript, No. 5 at pp. 

92–93) 

In their comments, the CA IOUs 

expressed concern that universal 

position lamps were less efficacious 

and, because they are less expensive 

than position-dedicated lamps, they 

might be substituted in positiondedicated applications. (CA IOUs, No. 8 

at pp. 2–3) The CA IOUs urged DOE to 

require testing universal position lamps 

at multiple orientations, suggesting that 

two or three additional orientations 

would not add significant testing 

burden. (CA IOUs, No. 8 at pp. 2–3) The 

Joint Comment agreed, encouraging 

DOE to examine the range of efficacy 

levels of universal position lamps when 

operated in a horizontal position. (Joint 

Comment, No. 9 at p. 2) NEMA stated 

that it agreed with ANSI C78.389, which 

limits testing to a lamp’s specified 

orientation or a vertical base-up 

orientation if not specified (including 

universal position lamps). (NEMA, No. 

6 at p. 11) 

DOE reviewed manufacturer 

performance data for horizontal position 

only lamps, vertical base-up position 

only lamps, and universal position 

lamps (tested in a vertical, base-up 

position). In its review, DOE found the 

data reported in catalogs did not 

provide conclusive evidence of 

differences in efficacy between these 

lamp types. DOE also reviewed 

published data, such as manufacturer 

catalogs, for universal orientation lamps 

when operated in vertical base-up and 

horizontal orientations. This data 

suggests that universal position lamps 

are generally less efficacious when 

operated in a horizontal orientation. 

DOE acknowledges that 

manufacturers cannot know the 

orientation in which universal lamps 

will be operated, and agrees that testing 

at multiple orientations would impose 

an undue burden. At the January 2012 

TP public meeting, OSRAM SYLVANIA 

and GE stated that universal orientation 

lamps are most commonly used in a 

vertical position. (OSRAM SYLVANIA, 

Public Meeting Transcript, No. 5 at p. 

91; GE, Public Meeting Transcript, No. 

5 at p. 92) 

Vertical position specifies the 

orientation of the lamp, but does not 

denote whether the base is up or down 

in the orientation. Of the HID lamps, 

only MH lamps are affected by operating 

position. Vertical burning MH lamps are 

available in base-up, base-down, and 

base-up/base-down designations. 

Universal lamps are specified for 

projects for two major reasons: (1) The 

fixture can be aimed (e.g., a floodlight) 

and is going to be aimed at angle that 

is not entirely vertical or horizontal; and 

(2) there are multiple types of fixtures 

at the site (e.g., a bollard with a basedown socket, an area lighting fixture 

with a base-up socket, or a downlight 

fixture with a base-up socket) that use 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS3

29648 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 99 / Thursday, May 22, 2014 / Proposed Rules 

22Base down requires the socket to be at the 

‘‘bottom’’ of the fixture and the socket occludes 

light, causing a dark spot directly below the fixture. 

the same type of lamp. By specifying the 

universal lamp, the one lamp type can 

be stocked for each type of fixture, 

simplifying maintenance at the site. 

Vertical base up is the most common 

orientation of MH lamps because more 

fixtures (e.g., high-bay; low-bay; 

downlights; parking structure fixtures; 

most pole-mounted area ‘‘shoeboxes’’ 

fixtures) need this orientation for optical 

reasons to distribute the light.22

In this SNOPR, DOE retains its 

original proposal that HID lamps with a 

manufacturer-specified operating 

position be tested in the position 

specified, and that HID lamps with no 

specified operating position (including 

universal orientation lamps) be tested in 

the vertical base-up orientation. 

3. Special Considerations for Directional 

Lamps 

Directional lamps, which are typically 

reflector lamps with a discernible beam 

pattern, have different setup and 

measurement requirements than omnidirectional lamps. In the December 2011 

TP NOPR, DOE proposed set-up and 

measurement requirements of 

directional lamps in accordance with 

ANSI C78.379, which provides 

classification of beam patterns and 

specification of directional lamp 

measurement and evaluation. 76 FR 

77914, 77923 (Dec. 15, 2011). 

The CA IOUs and the Joint Comment 

supported DOE’s proposal to develop a 

new metric and test procedures for 

directional HID lamps. (CA IOUs, No. 8 

at p. 4; Joint Comment, No. 9 at p. 1) 

NEMA agreed with using ANSI C78.379, 

but noted that industry standards and 

technical guidance are being developed 

for directional lamps, and 

recommended that DOE not include 

directional lamps in its rulemakings 

until the new industry references are 

available. (NEMA, No. 6 at p. 11) 

In the February 2013 HID lamps ECS 

Interim Analysis document, DOE stated 

that it was considering excluding 

directional HID lamps from standards 

coverage, citing their small market share 

and the fact that this application is 

replacing less-efficient halogen lamps. 

(Docket No. EERE–2010–BT–STD–0043) 

As a result, DOE is not including 

directional lamp testing in this SNOPR. 

D. Test Measurements and Calculations 

1. Measurement and Calculation of 

Efficacy 

In the December 2011 TP NOPR, DOE 

proposed that HID lamp efficacy be 

calculated as the initial lumen output 

divided by the measured input lamp 

wattage, with the resulting quotient 

rounded off to the nearest tenth of a 

lumen per watt. 76 FR 77914, 77923 

(Dec. 15, 2011). This requirement is 

consistent with the 2009 GSFL/GSIL/

IRL test procedures final rule, in which 

DOE required testing to a tenth of a 

lumen per watt. 74 FR 31829, 31836 

(July 6, 2009). 

In this SNOPR, DOE proposes specific 

provisions for initial lumen output and 

lamp input power measurements for 

clarity. DOE proposes that the initial 

lumen output be measured in 

accordance with section II.C.1.d, in 

which DOE maintained its proposal 

from the NOPR that photometric testing 

be conducted per IES LM–51–2013. For 

lamp input power, DOE proposes 

measurements be conducted in 

accordance with section 3.5, 3.9, and 

3.10 of ANSI C78.389. Section 3.5 

details the circuit types that can be used 

for the connecting the required 

measurement instrumentation, 

including the reference ballast, 

voltmeter, wattmeter, and/or ammeter to 

the HID lamp. Section 3.9 describes the 

methods necessary to compensate for 

the presence of instruments in the lamp 

circuit when taking the measurements. 

Lastly, section 3.10 (which applies 

exclusively to HPS lamps) gives 

instructions for the measurement of 

lamp amperes and volts at nominal 

lamp wattage. To measure the wattage of 

an HID lamp, if a voltmeter and 

ammeter are used then the product of 

the measured voltage and the current is 

the lamp wattage (input electrical 

power) of the HID lamp. If a wattmeter 

is used, then the measured value in 

watts is the lamp wattage of the HID 

lamp. DOE did not receive any 

comments following the December 2011 

TP NOPR regarding input power 

measurements for HID lamps. In this 

SNOPR, DOE proposes to calculate HID 

lamp efficacy as the measured initial 

lumen output divided by the measured 

input power in watts, with the resulting 

quotient rounded off to the nearest tenth 

of a lumen per watt. DOE requests 

comment on the input power and lumen 

output measurements necessary to 

calculate lamp efficacy. 

2. Measurement and Calculation of 

Center Beam Intensity and Beam Angle 

In the December 2011 TP NOPR, DOE 

proposed measuring center beam 

intensity and calculating the beam angle 

for directional lamps using the 

procedures described in ANSI C78.379. 

76 FR 77914, 77923 (Dec. 15, 2011). 

During the January 2012 TP public 

meeting, NEMA expressed general 

concern about DOE’s directional HID 

lamp requirements. (NEMA, Public 

Meeting Transcript, No. 5 at pp. 88–89) 

GE clarified that NEMA agreed with 

using ANSI C78.379, but that its 

concern was related to the specific 

metrics and related tolerances once the 

measurements were completed. (GE, 

Public Meeting Transcript, No. 5 at p. 

89) NEMA elaborated that measuring 

the beam performance of directional 

lamps increases the measurement 

variation if zonal lumens are used to set 

efficiency limits. (NEMA, No. 6 at p. 11) 

As discussed in section II.C.3, DOE is 

considering excluding directional lamps 

from its HID lamps ECS rulemaking. For 

this reason, DOE is not including center 

beam intensity or beam angle 

calculation provisions in this SNOPR. 

3. Measurement and Calculation of 

Correlated Color Temperature and Color 

Rendering Index 

In the December 2011 TP NOPR, DOE 

proposed to adopt CCT and CRI 

measurement methods based on CIE 15 

and CIE 13.3. 76 FR 77914, 77924 (Dec. 

15, 2011). DOE previously incorporated 

these standards in the GSFL/GSIL/IRL 

test procedures final rule. 74 FR 31829, 

31834 (July 6, 2009). 

During the January 2012 TP public 

meeting, the CA IOUs asked NEMA to 

distinguish its position on the proposed 

methodology for color quality 

measurements from its disagreement of 

using color quality to establish 

equipment classes in the HID lamps 

ECS. (CA IOUs, Public Meeting 

Transcript, No. 5 at pp. 106–107) NEMA 

responded that it had no issue with the 

proposed methods for measuring color 

quality of HID lamps. (NEMA, Public 

Meeting Transcript, No. 5 at p. 107) 

NEMA commented that test standards 

are appropriate for CCT and CRI for 

lamps at 100 hours. NEMA further 

elaborated that the industry does not 

endorse the concept of CRI or CCT 

maintenance. (NEMA, No. 6 at p. 3) 

DOE acknowledges that after HID lamps 

have been seasoned (operated for 100 

hours), the color characteristics can be 

measured. Although DOE is considering 

using initial CCT and CRI to determine 

scope and equipment classes in the HID 

lamps ECS rulemaking, DOE is not 

considering CCT or CRI maintenance 

requirements. (Docket No. EERE–2010– 

BT–STD–0043) 

DOE acknowledges that the color shift 

of HID lamps occurs over time and is 

not possible to predict. Therefore, DOE 

proposes that after the initial seasoning 

period (100 hours of operation), 

manufacturers would measure CCT 

values for 21 HID lamps (see section 

II.C.2.b.i for a discussion of proposed 

sample size requirements). The sample 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS3

Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 99 / Thursday, May 22, 2014 / Proposed Rules 29649 

23ENERGY STAR Lighting Stakeholder— 

www.energystar.gov/products/specs/sites/products/

files/ES_Luminiares_1%202_Letter_FINAL.pdf— 

last accessed October 26, 2013 

mean CCT values would be the 

representative values for the basic 

model. CRI values would be tested in 

the same manner. DOE proposes test 

procedures for CRI only because CRI is 

being considered in the standards 

rulemaking to define the CRI above 

which standards will not be considered 

for lamps. DOE and manufacturers 

would use the proposed CRI test method 

to determine whether lamps are subject 

to the potential standards. 

i. Correlated Color Temperature 

In the past, DOE has used CCT to 

define and categorize certain kinds of 

lamps (e.g., modified-spectrum 

fluorescent and incandescent lamps, 

and general service fluorescent lamps). 

DOE is considering CCT as a means to 

define equipment classes for HID lamps. 

For HID lamp testing, in the December 

2011 TP NOPR, DOE proposed to adopt 

the procedures and methods in CIE 15 

to determine HID lamp CCT. 76 FR 

77914, 77924 (Dec. 15, 2011). 

Ushio commented that DOE should 

establish CCT requirements for MH 

lamps used in general lighting 

applications, but not for MH lamps used 

for special applications such as 

disinfection, curing, and aquariums. 

(Ushio, No. 7 at p. 1) In the concurrent 

HID lamps ECS rulemaking, DOE is 

considering excluding certain HID 

lamps in a given CCT range from 

coverage because they are used only for 

specialty applications. DOE will address 

comments related to CCT requirements 

as part of the standards rulemaking. 

NEMA stated that if CCT 

requirements are established, CCT 

should have a tolerance of 4 percent. 

(NEMA, No. 6 at p. 3) DOE researched 

CCT and considered three options 

related to tolerances for CCT values for 

HID lamps: 

1. Set a fixed tolerance of at least 4 percent 

for the CCT value as proposed by NEMA in 

written comments. For other covered 

products (i.e., general service fluorescent 

lamps), however, DOE does not apply a 

percent tolerance to CCT values. Therefore, 

DOE found that this percentage-based 

tolerance would be inconsistent with other 

lighting products and does not propose to use 

this tolerance method. 

2. Define the x,y coordinates for the 

different nominal CCTs, and then apply a 

seven-step MacAdam ellipse to the center of 

the x,y value. If the measured x,y values 

corresponding to a lamp’s CCT were within 

that ellipse, the lamp would be characterized 

by that nominal CCT. This is the standard 

protocol for lighting industry chromaticity 

standards. 

No industry chromaticity standards are 

currently defined for HID lamps. DOE 

researched available chromaticity standards 

for fluorescent lamps (ANSI C78.376–2001) 

and solid-state lighting (SSL) (ANSI C78.377– 

2011). DOE notes that in the ENERGY STAR 

November 30, 2012 letter, EPA stated that 

there is no industry standard to reference.23

DOE researched publicly available 

chromaticity data for HID lamps found in 

manufacturer catalogs, and found that the 

graphed x,y coordinates for many HID lamps 

would not fall within the seven-step 

MacAdam ellipses for nominal fluorescent 

lamp CCT values in ANSI C78.376–2001. 

Because of the lack of industry chromaticity 

standards for HID lamps, and DOE’s findings 

that HID lamps often do not fall within the 

seven-step MacAdam ellipses for fluorescent 

lamps, DOE rejects this method of testing 

CCT values in HID lamps. 

3. Round the mean of the sample of lamps’ 

CCT values to the nearest 10 kelvin, as is 

prescribed in test procedures for general 

service fluorescent lamps in 10 CFR part 430, 

subpart B, appendix R. In the 2012 GSFL/

GSIL/IRL test procedures final rule, DOE 

discussed originally requiring rounding to 

the nearest single kelvin, but increased it to 

the nearest 10 kelvin per a recommendation 

from NEMA and in consultation with NIST. 

77 FR 4203, 4207 (Jan. 27, 2012). 

Therefore, DOE proposes that the HID 

lamps be measured for CCT and, like the 

rounding approach used in the GSFL/

GSIL/IRL test procedures, that CCT 

values be rounded to the nearest 10 

kelvin. 

ii. Color Rendering Index 

In the December 2011 TP NOPR, DOE 

proposed a test method to measure CRI 

because DOE was considering CRI as a 

means to define the scope of coverage 

for HID lamps for potential energy 

conservation standards. DOE proposed 

to adopt the methods and procedures set 

forth in CIE 13.3 to determine lamp CRI. 

76 FR 77914, 77924 (Dec. 15, 2011). 

The CA IOUs supported the proposed 

color quality measurements. (CA IOUs, 

No. 8 at p. 2) NEMA commented that 

CCT and CRI have little relevance to the 

energy efficiency of HID lamps. (NEMA, 

No. 6 at p. 3) However, in commenting 

on the February 2012 HID lamps ECS 

Framework document, NEMA 

supported using CRI as a metric for 

possible exclusion of certain lamps (e.g., 

high CRI, low CCT lamps), also noting 

that CRI could affect an equation-based 

efficacy standard. (Docket No. EERE– 

2010–BT–STD–0043, NEMA, No. 7 at 

pp. 5, 21) 

In the HID lamps ECS rulemaking, 

DOE is considering a CRI above which 

lamps would not be considered for 

standards. (Docket No. EERE–2010–BT– 

STD–0043) DOE and manufacturers 

would use the proposed CRI test method 

to determine whether a lamp is subject 

to standards based on CRI applied to a 

basic model of lamp. In this SNOPR, 

DOE proposes that the CRI of HID lamps 

be rounded to the nearest whole 

number, as is consistent with rounding 

for other lighting technologies. 

NEMA stated that if CRI requirements 

are established, CRI measurements 

should be given a tolerance of at least 

3 percent. (NEMA, No. 6 at p. 3) In the 

HID lamps ECS rulemaking, DOE is only 

considering using CRI to determine 

whether a particular lamp model is 

considered for standards. The CRI itself 

is not under consideration for being 

regulated or reported. (Docket No. 

EERE–2010–BT–STD–0043) Because of 

this, DOE did not give further 

consideration to the tolerance of at least 

3 percent requested by NEMA. 

4. Test Method for Measuring Lumen 

Maintenance 

In the December 2011 TP NOPR, DOE 

proposed measuring lumen 

maintenance for HID lamps at 40 

percent and 70 percent of rated lamp 

life, as described in LM–47. 76 FR 

77914, 77923–24, 77934 (Dec. 15, 2011). 

The Joint Comment supported 

measuring lumen maintenance, which is 

used in lighting design calculations to 

estimate future light output and energy 

use in lighting systems more accurately. 

The Joint Comment stated that 

improved lumen maintenance results in 

energy savings in the field and 

encouraged DOE to include lumen 

maintenance in the test procedures. 

(Joint Comment, No. 9 at p. 1) The CA 

IOUs also supported DOE’s proposal to 

measure lumen maintenance for HID 

lamps. (CA IOUs, No. 8 at p. 1) 

NEMA raised a number of logistical 

issues related to the proposal and was 

generally not supportive of lumen 

maintenance testing. NEMA cited 

particular concerns about lumen 

maintenance testing for HID lamps, 

including: (1) The significant capital 

investment and operating expenses for 

long-term testing of 21 or more samples 

for tens or hundreds of basic models, 

ranging in wattage from 50 to 1,000 

watts; (2) the difficulty of obtaining 

NVLAP accreditation for manufacturer 

testing facilities for lumen maintenance; 

and (3) the potential delays in new 

product introduction while long-term 

lumen maintenance data is gathered. 

(NEMA, No. 6 at pp. 2, 3, 12, 13) NEMA 

stated that new product introduction to 

the market could be delayed if testing at 

40 percent of rated life is required 

before a lamp can be introduced. 

(NEMA, No. 6 at p. 3) 

At this time, DOE does not plan to 

include lumen maintenance 

requirements in potential energy 

conservation standards for HID lamps, 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS3

29650 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 99 / Thursday, May 22, 2014 / Proposed Rules 

24 DOE researched the use of lumen maintenance 

extrapolation in industry standards and test 

procedures from ANSI, CIE, IESNA, and NEMA and 

did not find any details on lumen maintenance 

extrapolation. DOE also did a general search of 

publicly available peer-reviewed lighting literature, 

technical reports, manufacturer data sheets, and did 

not find test procedures to extrapolate the lumen 

maintenance of HID lamps. 

and therefore does not propose to 

require lumen maintenance 

measurement to demonstrate 

compliance with any final standards. In 

this SNOPR, DOE addresses comments 

on lumen maintenance testing regarding 

updated industry test standards, 

measured points in rated life, and test 

burden. 

In the December 2011 TP NOPR, DOE 

referenced LM–47–01. 76 FR 77914, 

77916–17, 77923–24 (Dec. 15, 2011). 

Intertek commented on the use of older 

versions of IES standards (i.e., LM–47), 

stating they may have been recently 

revised or be under revision. (Intertek, 

Public Meeting Transcript, No. 5 at p. 

121) DOE is no longer proposing to 

incorporate LM–47 because DOE no 

longer proposes in this SNOPR to 

measure the lumen maintenance of HID 

lamps. 

NEMA commented that the 2012 

version of the IES Design Guide 10 (DG– 

10–12) states ‘‘mean lumens are defined 

as the lumens emitted at 40 percent 

(fluorescent and HID) or 50 percent 

(other sources) of rated lamp life.’’ 

(NEMA, No. 6 at p. 3) NEMA stated that 

this definition is incorrect, and should 

specify 40 percent for MH/MH lamps 

and 50 percent for HPS lamps. (NEMA, 

No. 6 at pp. 2–3) NEMA stated that it 

has alerted IES to the error. NEMA 

stated that the accepted industry 

practice is to measure lumen 

maintenance at 40 percent of rated life 

for MH lamps. (NEMA, No. 6 at pp. 2– 

3) For HPS and MV lamps, NEMA stated 

that the accepted industry practice is to 

measure lumen maintenance at 50 

percent of rated life. (NEMA, No. 6 at 

pp. 2–3) 

The CA IOUs were supportive of 

measuring lumen output at one defined 

point in the rated lamp life for all HID 

lamp types. The CA IOUs further 

encouraged lumen maintenance testing 

even if the proposed 40 percent and 70 

percent measurement points had to be 

modified to accommodate industry 

concerns. (CA IOUs, No. 8 at pp. 1–2) 

NEMA commented that HID lamps can 

have very long operating lifetimes (e.g., 

greater than 40,000 hours), and that 

measuring at 70 percent of life could 

require multiple years of lamp 

operation. (NEMA, No. 6 at p. 2) NEMA 

speculated that the proposed 

measurement at 70 percent of life was 

derived from the ‘‘L70’’ value for SSL 

products, which designates the 

operating hours at which an SSL 

product still maintains 70 percent of 

initial light output. (NEMA, No. 6 at pp. 

2–3) The CA IOUs supported a second 

lumen maintenance test at 70 percent of 

rated lamp life, stating that lumen 

maintenance is a significant factor in the 

specification of HID lamp and ballast 

systems. (CA IOUs, No. 8 at pp. 1–2) 

The Joint Comment stated that most 

lighting systems are designed based on 

the mean light output of the lamps. 

(Joint Comment, No. 9 at p. 1) DOE 

understands the 40 and 50 percent of 

rated lamp lifetimes are the traditional 

points in time when lumen maintenance 

is measured. DOE notes that LM–47 

contains the 70 percent of rated lamp 

lifetime and DOE was not conflating it 

with L70 value for SSL. DOE no longer 

proposes to measure lumen 

maintenance as part of this SNOPR. 

NEMA also stated that if 40 percent of 

life lumen maintenance is required, for 

newly introduced products DOE should 

allow projection of lumen maintenance 

values using manufacturer-accepted 

practices. (NEMA, No. 6 at p. 3) NEMA 

stressed that existing data should be 

used, where possible, to reduce 

potential delays to market. (NEMA, No. 

6 at pp. 2, 13; NEMA, Public Meeting 

Transcript, No. 5 at pp. 35–36, 39–42) 

The CA IOUs also supported lumen 

maintenance testing and suggested that 

standardizing on a measurement point 

of 40 percent of rated lamp life for all 

HID lamps would not be overly 

burdensome to manufacturers, and 

would facilitate comparison of lamps. 

(CA IOUs, No. 8 at pp. 1–2) DOE 

reviewed technical reports, industry test 

procedures, and other literature and 

could not find a lumen maintenance 

extrapolation methodology for HID 

lamps.24 DOE understands both the 

potential burden and advantage of 

standardizing on a point in lamp life to 

reduce the burden to manufacturers. 

However, lumen maintenance is not 

under consideration for use in the HID 

lamps ECS rulemaking. (Docket No. 

EERE–2010–BT–STD–0043) Because of 

this, DOE no longer proposes testing 

lumen maintenance in this SNOPR. 

E. Active Modes—Less Than Full 

Output (Dimming) 

1. Measurement of Dimming 

Performance for Potential Energy 

Conservation Standards 

In the December 2011 TP NOPR, DOE 

proposed a requirement that the HID 

lamp be energized before efficiency 

testing was conducted. 76 FR 77914, 

77921 (Dec. 15, 2011). DOE did not 

propose testing at reduced light output. 

At the January 2012 TP public meeting, 

the CA IOUs asked about HID lamps 

designed to operate on dimming 

systems, to which OSRAM SYLVANIA 

responded that HID lamps are typically 

not designed for dimming, but can be 

dimmed in compatible lamp and ballast 

systems. (CA IOUs, Public Meeting 

Transcript, No. 5 at pp. 113–114; 

OSRAM SYLVANIA, Public Meeting 

Transcript, No. 5 at p. 114) In written 

comments, the CA IOUs noted that 

dimming performance can vary 

significantly among HID lamp 

technologies, and encouraged DOE to 

develop a procedure to test and measure 

the performance of HID lamps in a 

dimmed state. (CA IOUs, No. 8 at p. 4) 

The Joint Comment agreed. (Joint 

Comment, No. 9 at p. 2) 

In the April 2010 HID lamps notice of 

proposed determination, DOE stated 

that dimming (operating the lamps at 

less than full power) HID lamps is 

uncommon. 76 FR 22031, 22034 (April 

27, 2010). NEMA responded that there 

were currently no industry standards for 

dimming HID lamp and ballast systems, 

although an industry task force had 

been organized to address the issue. 

(Docket No. EE–DET–03–001, NEMA, 

No. 2 at p. 2) NEMA also directed DOE 

to NEMA LSD 14–2010, ‘‘Guidelines on 

the Application of Dimming HighIntensity Discharge Lamps.’’ (Docket No. 

EE–DET–03–001, NEMA, No. 2 at p. 2) 

DOE has since reviewed LSD 14–2010 

and identified three major issues related 

to dimming HID lamps: 

1. HID lamps should not be dimmed below 

50 percent of rated lamp wattage. 

2. Color, lamp life, lumen depreciation, 

and efficacy can be affected by dimming. 

3. Lamps, ballasts, and control systems 

could have compatibility issues because each 

component of the HID system would be 

required to be designed for use with dimming 

(i.e., a dimmable HID lamp could not be 

placed on any existing ballast and be 

dimmed, it would have to be placed 

specifically on a dimmable ballast in order 

for the lamp to be dimmed). 

In the February 2013 HID lamps ECS 

Interim Analysis document, DOE stated 

that it plans to assess HID lamp 

performance at full light output only. 

(Docket No. EERE–2010–BT–STD–0043, 

DOE, Framework Document, No. 2 at 

pp. 15) Therefore, in this SNOPR, DOE 

is not proposing to require testing of 

HID lamps in the dimmed state for 

potential energy conservation standards. 

F. Standby Mode and Off Mode Energy 

Usage 

In the December 2011 TP NOPR, DOE 

stated that HID lamps do not operate in 

standby or off mode and, thus, energy 

use in those states would not be 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS3

Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 99 / Thursday, May 22, 2014 / Proposed Rules 29651 

measured. 76 FR 77914, 77924 (Dec. 15, 

2011). DOE received no comments on its 

proposed approach. This proposal is 

unaffected by this SNOPR. 

G. Laboratory Accreditation Program 

In the December 2011 TP NOPR, DOE 

proposed that testing be conducted by 

test laboratories accredited by NVLAP 

or an accrediting organization 

recognized by NVLAP. 76 FR 77914, 

77923 (Dec. 15, 2011). NVLAP 

establishes standards for the 

accreditation of laboratories that test for 

compliance with relevant industry 

standards pursuant to 15 CFR 285.3. Id. 

A manufacturer’s or importer’s own 

laboratory, if accredited, may be used to 

conduct the applicable testing. 15 CFR 

285.3. 

DOE received comments on the 

following related topics: (1) Additional 

accrediting organizations; (2) color 

measurements; (3) lab-to-lab 

measurement variations; and (4) lumen 

maintenance testing and NVLAP. 

NEMA generally supported DOE’s 

proposed laboratory accreditation 

requirements but stated that NVLAP 

does not recognize other accrediting 

organizations. NEMA cautioned DOE 

against involving other accrediting 

organizations, citing additional 

administrative and cost burdens, and 

recommended that DOE limit its 

laboratory accreditation requirements to 

NVLAP-accredited laboratories only. 

(NEMA, No. 6 at p. 12) NEMA also 

stated that any CCT or CRI 

measurements should be performed by 

an NVLAP-accredited facility. (NEMA, 

No. 6 at p. 3) 

NEMA stated that almost all HID lamp 

lumen maintenance testing occurs at 

lamp manufacturing facilities, which are 

typically not NVLAP-accredited. 

(NEMA, No. 6 at p. 13) During the 

March 2012 ECS public meeting, 

Venture elaborated by stating that 

manufacturers support using NVLAPaccredited laboratories for testing color 

and efficacy, but that lumen 

maintenance testing could overload 

these external laboratories. Venture 

stated that this was a similar problem 

with GSIL life testing. (Docket No. 

EERE–2010–BT–STD–0043, Venture, 

No. 7 at pp. 166–167) DOE recognizes 

these comments related to lumen 

maintenance but no longer proposes 

lumen maintenance as part of this 

SNOPR. 

DOE finds that the benefits from 

testing in NVLAP-accredited 

laboratories only do not outweigh the 

costs, both in terms of financial costs 

and additional time before new lamp 

models are approved for commercial 

sale. Because of this, DOE does not 

propose that testing related to efficacy 

and color measurements be performed 

in NVLAP-accredited laboratories only. 

DOE requests comment on the proposal 

to not require testing to be performed in 

NVLAP-accredited laboratories only. 

NEMA directed DOE to NVLAP’s 

‘‘Proficiency Testing for Energy Efficient 

Lighting Products,’’ which shows lab-tolab measurement variations of more 

than 4 percent, depending on the lamp 

technology. (NEMA, No. 6 at p. 13) DOE 

researched this document and 

determined that the ‘‘Proficiency 

Testing for Energy Efficient Lighting 

Products’’ document is still being 

developed and not available. 

H. Effective Date and Compliance Date 

for the Test Procedures and Compliance 

Date for Submitting High-Intensity 

Discharge Lamp Certification Reports 

1. Effective Date for the Test Procedures 

The test procedures will be effective 

30 days after publication of any final 

rule in the Federal Register. 

2. Compliance Date for the Test 

Procedures 

The compliance date for making any 

representations of the energy efficiency 

of covered HID lamps is 180 days from 

the date of the publication of any final 

rule in the Federal Register. On or after 

that date, any such representations, 

including those made on marketing 

materials and product labels, would be 

required to be based on results 

generated under the final test 

procedures and the applicable sampling 

plans. 

3. Compliance Date for Submitting 

High-Intensity Discharge Lamp 

Certification Reports 

Until DOE establishes energy 

conservation standards for HID lamps, 

manufacturers, including importers, are 

not required to submit compliance 

statements or certification reports for 

HID lamps. DOE will address these 

requirements should DOE establish 

energy conservation standards for HID 

lamps. 

III. Procedural Issues and Regulatory 

Review 

A. Review Under Executive Order 12866 

The Office of Management and Budget 

(OMB) has determined that test 

procedures rulemakings do not 

constitute ‘‘significant regulatory 

actions’’ under section 3(f) of Executive 

Order 12866, ‘‘Regulatory Planning and 

Review,’’ 58 FR 51735 (Oct. 4, 1993). 

Accordingly, this action was not subject 

to review under the Executive Order by 

the Office of Information and Regulatory 

Affairs (OIRA) in the OMB. 

B. Review Under the Regulatory 

Flexibility Act 

The Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 

U.S.C. 601 et seq.) requires preparation 

of a regulatory flexibility analysis for 

any rule that by law must be proposed 

for public comment, unless the agency 

certifies that the rule, if promulgated, 

will not have a significant economic 

impact on a substantial number of small 

entities. As required by Executive Order 

13272, ‘‘Proper Consideration of Small 

Entities in Agency Rulemaking,’’ 67 FR 

53461 (Aug. 16, 2002), DOE published 

procedures and policies to ensure that 

the potential impacts of its rules on 

small entities are properly considered 

during the DOE rulemaking process. 68 

FR 7990 (Feb. 19, 2003). DOE has made 

its procedures and policies available on 

the Office of the General Counsel’s Web 

site: http://energy.gov/gc/office-generalcounsel. 

DOE reviewed the test procedures 

considered in today’s SNOPR under the 

provisions of the Regulatory Flexibility 

Act (RFA) and the policies and 

procedures published on February 19, 

2003. As discussed in more detail 

below, DOE found that because the 

proposed test procedures have not 

previously been required of 

manufacturers, all manufacturers, 

including small manufacturers, may 

potentially experience a financial 

burden associated with new testing 

requirements. While examining this 

issue, DOE determined that it could not 

certify that the proposed rule, if 

promulgated, would not have a 

significant impact on a substantial 

number of small entities. Therefore, 

DOE has prepared an Initial Regulatory 

Flexibility Analysis (IRFA) for this 

rulemaking. The IRFA describes the 

potential impacts on small businesses 

associated with HID lamp testing and 

labeling requirements. DOE has 

transmitted a copy of this IRFA to the 

Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the Small 

Business Administration (SBA) for 

review. 

1. Estimated Small Business Burden 

SBA has set a size threshold for 

electric lamp manufacturers to describe 

those entities that are classified as 

‘‘small businesses’’ for the purposes of 

the IRFA. DOE used the SBA’s small 

business size standards to determine 

whether any small manufacturers of HID 

lamps would be subject to the 

requirements of the rule. 65 FR 30836, 

30849 (May 15, 2000), as amended at 65 

FR 53533, 53545 (Sept. 5, 2000) and 

codified at 13 CFR part 121. The size 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS3

29652 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 99 / Thursday, May 22, 2014 / Proposed Rules 

25The electricity rate of $0.1052 per kWh is the 

average commercial rate year from January through 

February 2014 from the U.S. Energy Information 

Administration’s (EIA’s) Electric Power Monthly, 

October 2013, Table 5.3, available at: www.eia.gov/ 

electricity/monthly/ (last accessed April 4, 2014). 

NEMA’s written comments reference an 

electricity cost of $0.10 per kWh. These rates 

should be considered the same for most purposes. 

standards are listed by North American 

Industry Classification System (NAICS) 

code and industry descriptions are 

available at http://www.sba.gov/sites/

default/files/files/Size_Standards_

Table.pdf. 

In the December 2011 TP NOPR, DOE 

stated that none of the HID lamp 

manufacturers surveyed would be 

considered a small business under SBA 

size standards—NAICS code 335110 

and under 1,000 employees. 76 FR 

77914, 77925 (Dec. 15, 2011). In making 

this determination, DOE developed a 

list of potential manufacturers by 

referring to the energy conservation 

standards (Docket EERE–2010–BT– 

STD–0043), reviewing NEMA 

membership, and surveying the lighting 

industry. After developing the list of 

potential manufacturers, DOE 

researched each manufacturer to 

determine if the manufacturer was 

domestic and how many employees the 

manufacturer employed. DOE received 

no comments on its statement on small 

businesses following the December 2011 

TP NOPR. However, DOE’s additional 

review identified two small 

manufacturers that potentially qualify 

for a small business under NAICS 

335110 because these companies had 

fewer than 1,000 employees, were 

domestic, and not owned by a subsidy 

or owned by a larger company. 

DOE also acknowledges Philips and 

NEMA’s comments that DOE 

underestimated testing expenses in the 

December 2011 TP NOPR. Philips stated 

in the HID TP public meeting that 

annual electricity cost alone for lumen 

maintenance testing would exceed $200 

per individual lamp, extrapolating to 

$4,200 for a sample size of 21 lamps. 

Philips estimated their catalog 

represents 200 basic models and thus 

the total cost of electricity could be over 

$2.3 million (accounting for the fact that 

lumen maintenance testing could 

require two to three years to complete). 

(Public Meeting Transcript, No. 5 at pp. 

110–111) NEMA reiterated that 

electricity costs for lumen maintenance 

testing were $200 per lamp (or more 

than $4,200 for 21 lamps of a basic 

model per year). (NEMA, No. 6 at p. 13) 

DOE determined that GE, Philips, and 

OSRAM SYLVANIA (none of which 

qualify as small HID lamp 

manufacturers) each possibly have more 

than 200 basic models of HID lamps, 

and used an estimated number of basic 

models from these manufacturers’ 

catalogs to estimate the potential annual 

electricity costs per manufacturer for 

lumen maintenance testing. As stated 

previously, DOE no longer proposes 

lumen maintenance testing for use with 

the possible energy conservation 

standard. 

Labor and operating costs associated 

with conducting the input power, 

lumen output, CCT and CRI testing 

contribute to overall burden. However, 

DOE believes that calculating the 

efficacy of an HID lamp does not result 

in any incremental testing burden 

beyond the cost of carrying out lumen 

output and input power testing. DOE 

expects that the majority of 

manufacturers are already testing for 

lumen output, input power, CCT and 

CRI, as these metrics are wellestablished and most manufacturers 

report the values in their catalogs. 

However, DOE’s sample size and other 

requirements may differ from those 

selected for a manufacturer’s existing 

data. Therefore, DOE included the cost 

of carrying out these tests in its 

assessment of testing burden. 

Table III.1 lists representative rated 

lamp wattages and the ballast input 

power required to operate the 

corresponding lamps. DOE calculated 

the annual costs of operating the lamps 

for representative ballast input power 

values. Table III.1 facilitates comparison 

of representative lamp wattages. 

TABLE III.1—RATED LAMP POWER AND ASSOCIATED BALLAST INPUT POWER

HPS MV 

Quartz Probe 

(MH) 

Quartz Pulse 

(MH) 

Ceramic Pulse 

(MH) 

Rated lamp 

wattage 

Input 

power W 

Rated lamp 

wattage 

Input 

power W 

Rated lamp 

wattage 

Input 

power W 

Rated lamp 

wattage 

Input 

power W 

Rated lamp 

wattage 

Input 

power W 

35 ................ 44 

50 ................ 60 50 ................ 68 50 ................ 70 50 ................ 70 

70 ................ 94 70 ................ 98 70 ................ 98 

75 ................ 93 

100 .............. 122 100 .............. 125 100 .............. 125 100 .............. 125 

150 .............. 185 150 .............. 185 150 .............. 185 

175 .............. 202 175 .............. 208 175 .............. 209 

200 .............. 230 

250 .............. 295 250 .............. 283 250 .............. 291 250 .............. 285 250 .............. 285 

320 .............. 367 320 .............. 367 

360 .............. 400 350 .............. 400 350 .............. 400 

400 .............. 465 400 .............. 454 400 .............. 456 400 .............. 458 400 .............. 458 

1000 ............ 1100 1000 ............ 1080 1000 ............ 1080 1000 ............ 1060 

1500 ............ 1610 

The potential total number of lamps 

tested is a function of the number of 

basic models and the required sample 

size. In the December 2011 TP NOPR, 

DOE proposed a sample size of 21 for 

lamp efficacy, CCT, and lumen 

maintenance. As previously stated in 

this SNOPR, DOE only plans to test 

lamp efficacy and CCT in setting 

potential HID lamps energy 

conservation standards (and CRI for 

excluding certain types of lamps from 

standards coverage). In addition, DOE 

continues to propose in this SNOPR to 

use a sample size for lamp efficacy and 

CCT of 21 lamps per basic model. 

For stabilization and related testing, 

DOE assumed 7 hours of operation for 

the MH lamps and 3 hours for HPS and 

MV lamps. That ballast input power 

required to operate the lamps (shown in 

Table III.1) was multiplied by the 

respective hours and an electricity rate 

of $0.1052 per kilowatt-hour (kWh).25

The costs in the table were calculated 

as follows: 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS3

Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 99 / Thursday, May 22, 2014 / Proposed Rules 29653 

26United States Department of Labor. Bureau of 

Labor Statistics Occupational Outlook Handbook. 

Washington, DC. (Last accessed April 7, 2014.) 

www.bls.gov/ooh/Architecture-and-Engineering/

home.htm. 

27Obtained from the Bureau of Labor Statistics 

(News Release: Employer Cost For Employee 

Compensation—December 2012, U.S. Department of 

Labor (December 2012), www.bls.gov/news.release/ 

ecec.nr0.htm. 

28Additional benefits include: Paid leave, 

supplemental pay, insurance, retirement and 

savings, Social Security, Medicare, unemployment 

insurance and workers compensation. 

Number of basic models (per lamp type) × 

sample size × input power × operating hours 

× $0.1052/kWh 

Table III.2 shows the operating costs 

for MV lamps for a possible 

manufacturer. The number of basic 

models is multiplied by the sample size 

by the input power (see Table III.1) by 

the operating hours (seasoning plus 

testing operation) and finally multiplied 

by the electricity cost per kilowatt-hour. 

The total cost for electricity for testing 

this family of lamps can be determined 

by summing the total electricity costs 

for the lamps—$1,218.52. The cost per 

basic model for electricity can be 

determined by dividing the total 

electricity costs ($1,218.52) by the total 

number of basic models (16), which is 

a cost per basic model of $76.16. 

TABLE III.2—EXAMPLE OPERATING ELECTRICITY COSTS FOR MV LAMPS

Rated lamp power # Basic 

models Samples Input power 

Operating 

hours 

Electricity 

rate 

Total electricity 

cost 

50 ............................................................. 1 21 68 103 $0.1052 $15.47 

75 ............................................................. 1 21 93 103 0.1052 21.16 

100 ........................................................... 4 21 125 103 0.1052 113.77 

175 ........................................................... 3 21 202 103 0.1052 137.89 

250 ........................................................... 2 21 283 103 0.1052 128.79 

400 ........................................................... 3 21 454 103 0.1052 309.92 

1000 ......................................................... 2 21 1080 103 0.1052 491.50 

Total cost for electricity for testing 

this family of lamps ....................... ........................ ........................ ........................ ........................ ........................ 1,218.52 

NEMA requested in its review of 

estimated testing costs that labor-year 

costs be added into the analysis. 

(NEMA, No. 6 at p. 13) DOE reviewed 

the 2012 median pay for electrical and 

electronic engineering technicians 

($57,850), electrical and electronics 

engineers ($89,630) and electromechanical technicians ($51,820), and 

calculated an average annual salary of 

$66,433 from the U.S. Department of 

Labor Bureau of Labor Statistics.26 This 

average was divided by 1,920 hours per 

year (40 hours per week for 48 weeks 

per year) to develop an hourly rate of 

$34.06. The hourly rate was multiplied 

by 31 percent 27 to account for 

benefits 28 to calculate an estimated total 

cost per hour of $45.32. 

DOE assumed that the testing 

technician would not be needed for the 

entire time because the technician can 

perform other tasks not related to testing 

the lamp while the lamp is being 

stabilized. Therefore, DOE multiplied 

the full labor rate by 50 percent of the 

expected total operation time of the 

lamp. 

Table III.3 shows the labor costs for 

MV lamps for a possible manufacturer. 

The number of basic models is 

multiplied by the sample size by the 

hourly labor rate by the testing time by 

the time utilization of the technician (50 

percent of the technician’s time during 

testing) to determine the total labor 

costs. The total example labor costs can 

be determined by summing all of the 

values in the total labor costs column to 

equal $22,841.28. The total example 

labor cost per basic model can be 

determined by dividing the total labor 

costs ($22,481.28) by the total quantity 

of basic models (16) to equal about 

$1,427.58. 

TABLE III.3—EXAMPLE LABOR COSTS FOR TESTING MV LAMPS

# Basic models Samples Lamp 

power 

Hourly 

labor rate Hours 

Time 

utilization 

(percent) 

Total labor 

costs 

1 ............................................................... 21 50 $45.32 3 50 $1,427.58 

1 ............................................................... 21 75 45.32 3 50 1,427.58 

4 ............................................................... 21 100 45.32 3 50 5,710.32 

3 ............................................................... 21 175 45.32 3 50 4,282.74 

2 ............................................................... 21 250 45.32 3 50 2,855.16 

3 ............................................................... 21 400 45.32 3 50 4,282.74 

2 ............................................................... 21 1000 45.32 3 50 2,855.16 

The process of determining the 

electricity costs (depicted in Table III.2) 

and determining the labor costs 

(depicted in Table III.3) was repeated for 

MH and HPS lamps. In summary, the 

cost for electricity per HPS basic model 

was $55.88 and per MH basic model 

was $59.81. The labor costs per HPS 

basic model was $1,427.58 and the labor 

costs per MH basic model was 

$3,331.02. 

In the August 30, 2013, memorandum 

documenting ex parte communication, 

NEMA indicated further reservations 

concerning future interpretation of the 

proposed definition of ‘‘basic model,’’ 

stating that because HID lamps are not 

classified into families, every HID lamp 

could potentially be identified as a 

separate basic model requiring testing 

and significantly increasing costs. 

(Docket EERE–2010–BT–STD–0043, 

NEMA No. 29 at p. 2) In response to 

NEMA’s comment about the lack of 

families for HID lamps, DOE analyzed a 

large number of potential basic models 

for each type of HID lamp. 

DOE was able to collect annual 

revenue estimates for the two small 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS3

29654 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 99 / Thursday, May 22, 2014 / Proposed Rules 

29According to Hoovers.com, the smallest of the 

two small business HID lamp manufacturers had 

revenues of $6.1 million per year. 

business HID lamp manufacturers using 

Hoovers.com company profile database. 

DOE determined that the mean revenue 

of the identified small business 

manufacturers is $10,300,000.29 DOE 

then analyzed the potential burden on 

one of the two small manufacturers as 

a proxy for all the small manufacturers. 

For this manufacturer, DOE identified 

36 different wattage MH lamps, 13 

different wattage HPS lamps, and 5 

different wattage MV lamps offered by 

the manufacturer. For each wattage and 

type of lamp, the manufacturer could 

possibly have between one and five 

different basic models. DOE estimated 

the total cost to test 21 samples, 

assuming that each lamp type/wattage 

combination was a basic model, to be 

$145,613.16. DOE estimated that a 

maximum total cost to test 21 samples, 

assuming that each lamp offered was 

treated as a different basic model, would 

be $321,681.36. According to DOE’s 

calculations, the proposed testing cost 

represents between 1.39 percent and 

3.06 percent of the mean revenues of the 

two small business manufacturers. DOE 

requests comment on the estimated 

number of small businesses that would 

be affected by the proposed rulemaking. 

The final cost per manufacturer 

primarily depends on the number of 

basic models of that lamp type that a 

manufacturer sells. Some lamp types 

have more basic models than others. 

These are not annual costs because DOE 

does not require manufacturers to retest 

a basic model annually. The initial test 

results used to generate a certified rating 

for a basic model remain valid as long 

as the basic model has not been 

modified from the tested design in a 

way that makes it less efficient or more 

consumptive, which would require a 

change to the certified rating. If a 

manufacturer has modified a basic 

model in a way that makes it more 

efficient or less consumptive, new 

testing is required only if the 

manufacturer wishes to make 

representations of the new, more 

efficient rating. 

DOE seeks comments on its 

determination that it could not certify 

that the proposed rule, if promulgated, 

would not have a significant impact on 

a substantial number of small entities. 

DOE also seeks comment on the 

methodologies and data used to reach 

this determination, including data on 

the average number of years a basic 

model remains unchanged (and 

therefore does not require annual 

retesting). 

C. Review Under the Paperwork 

Reduction Act of 1995 

There is currently no information 

collection requirement related to the test 

procedures for HID lamps. In the event 

that DOE proposes an energy 

conservation standard with which 

manufacturers must demonstrate 

compliance, or otherwise proposes to 

require the collection of information 

derived from the testing of HID lamps 

according to these test procedures, DOE 

will seek OMB approval of such 

information collection requirement. 

Manufacturers of covered products 

must certify to DOE that their products 

comply with any applicable energy 

conservation standard developed by 

DOE. In certifying compliance, 

manufacturers must test their products 

according to the applicable DOE test 

procedure, including any amendments 

adopted for that test procedure. 

DOE established regulations for the 

certification and recordkeeping 

requirements for certain covered 

consumer products and commercial 

equipment. 76 FR 12422 (March 7, 

2011). The collection-of-information 

requirement for the certification and 

recordkeeping was subject to review and 

approval by OMB under the Paperwork 

Reduction Act (PRA). This requirement 

was approved by OMB under OMB 

Control Number 1910–1400. Public 

reporting burden for the certification 

was estimated to average 20 hours per 

response, including the time for 

reviewing instructions, searching 

existing data sources, gathering and 

maintaining the data needed, and 

completing and reviewing the collection 

of information. 

As stated above, if DOE proposes an 

energy conservation standard for HID 

lamps with which manufacturers must 

demonstrate compliance, DOE will seek 

OMB approval of the associated 

information collection requirement. 

DOE will seek approval either through 

a proposed amendment to the 

information collection requirement 

approved under OMB Control Number 

1910–1400 or as a separate proposed 

information collection requirement. 

Notwithstanding any other provision 

of the law, no person is required to 

respond to, nor shall any person be 

subject to a penalty for failure to comply 

with, a collection of information subject 

to the requirements of the PRA, unless 

that collection of information displays a 

currently valid OMB Control Number. 

D. Review Under the National 

Environmental Policy Act of 1969 

In this proposed rule, DOE proposes 

test procedures that it expects will be 

used to develop and implement future 

energy conservation standards for HID 

lamps. DOE has determined that this 

rule falls into a class of actions that are 

categorically excluded from review 

under the National Environmental 

Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321 et 

seq.) and DOE’s implementing 

regulations at 10 CFR part 1021. 

Specifically, this proposed rule would 

establish test procedures without 

affecting the amount, quality, or 

distribution of energy usage, and 

therefore would not result in any 

environmental impacts. Thus, this 

rulemaking is covered by Categorical 

Exclusion A6 under 10 CFR part 1021, 

subpart D, which applies to any 

rulemaking that interprets or amends an 

existing rule without changing the 

environmental effect of that rule. 

Accordingly, neither an environmental 

assessment nor an environmental 

impact statement is required. 

E. Review Under Executive Order 13132 

Executive Order 13132, ‘‘Federalism,’’ 

64 FR 43255 (Aug. 4, 1999), imposes 

certain requirements on agencies 

formulating and implementing policies 

or regulations that preempt State law or 

that have Federalism implications. The 

Executive Order requires agencies to 

examine the constitutional and statutory 

authority supporting any action that 

would limit the policymaking discretion 

of the States and to carefully assess the 

necessity for such actions. The 

Executive Order also requires agencies 

to have an accountable process to 

ensure meaningful and timely input by 

State and local officials in the 

development of regulatory policies that 

have Federalism implications. On 

March 14, 2000, DOE published a 

statement of policy describing the 

intergovernmental consultation process 

it will follow in the development of 

such regulations. 65 FR 13735. DOE has 

examined this proposed rule and has 

determined that it would not have a 

substantial direct effect on the States, on 

the relationship between the national 

government and the States, or on the 

distribution of power and 

responsibilities among the various 

levels of government. EPCA governs and 

prescribes Federal preemption of State 

regulations as to energy conservation for 

the equipment that is the subject of 

today’s proposed rule. States can 

petition DOE for exemption from such 

preemption to the extent, and based on 

criteria, set forth in EPCA. (42 U.S.C. 

6297(d)) No further action is required by 

Executive Order 13132. 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS3

Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 99 / Thursday, May 22, 2014 / Proposed Rules 29655 

F. Review Under Executive Order 12988 

Regarding the review of existing 

regulations and the promulgation of 

new regulations, section 3(a) of 

Executive Order 12988, ‘‘Civil Justice 

Reform,’’ 61 FR 4729 (Feb. 7, 1996), 

imposes on Federal agencies the general 

duty to adhere to the following 

requirements: (1) Eliminate drafting 

errors and ambiguity; (2) write 

regulations to minimize litigation; (3) 

provide a clear legal standard for 

affected conduct rather than a general 

standard; and (4) promote simplification 

and burden reduction. Section 3(b) of 

Executive Order 12988 specifically 

requires that Executive agencies make 

every reasonable effort to ensure that the 

regulation: (1) Clearly specifies the 

preemptive effect, if any; (2) clearly 

specifies any effect on existing Federal 

law or regulation; (3) provides a clear 

legal standard for affected conduct 

while promoting simplification and 

burden reduction; (4) specifies the 

retroactive effect, if any; (5) adequately 

defines key terms; and (6) addresses 

other important issues affecting clarity 

and general draftsmanship under any 

guidelines issued by the Attorney 

General. Section 3(c) of Executive Order 

12988 requires Executive agencies to 

review regulations in light of applicable 

standards in sections 3(a) and 3(b) to 

determine whether they are met or it is 

unreasonable to meet one or more of 

them. DOE has completed the required 

review and determined that, to the 

extent permitted by law, the proposed 

rule meets the relevant standards of 

Executive Order 12988. 

G. Review Under the Unfunded 

Mandates Reform Act of 1995 

Title II of the Unfunded Mandates 

Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA) requires 

each Federal agency to assess the effects 

of Federal regulatory actions on State, 

local, and Tribal governments and the 

private sector. Public Law 104–4, sec. 

201 (codified at 2 U.S.C. 1531). For a 

proposed regulatory action likely to 

result in a rule that may cause the 

expenditure by State, local, and Tribal 

governments, in the aggregate, or by the 

private sector of $100 million or more 

in any one year (adjusted annually for 

inflation), section 202 of UMRA requires 

a Federal agency to publish a written 

statement that estimates the resulting 

costs, benefits, and other effects on the 

national economy. (2 U.S.C. 1532(a), (b)) 

The UMRA also requires a Federal 

agency to develop an effective process 

to permit timely input by elected 

officers of State, local, and Tribal 

governments on a proposed ‘‘significant 

intergovernmental mandate,’’ and 

requires an agency plan for giving notice 

and opportunity for timely input to 

potentially affected small governments 

before establishing any requirements 

that might significantly or uniquely 

affect small governments. On March 18, 

1997, DOE published a statement of 

policy on its process for 

intergovernmental consultation under 

UMRA. 62 FR 12820; also available at 

http://energy.gov/gc/office-generalcounsel. DOE examined today’s 

proposed rule according to UMRA and 

its statement of policy and determined 

that these requirements do not apply 

because the rule contains neither an 

intergovernmental mandate nor a 

mandate that may result in the 

expenditure of $100 million or more in 

any year. 

H. Review Under the Treasury and 

General Government Appropriations 

Act, 1999 

Section 654 of the Treasury and 

General Government Appropriations 

Act, 1999 (Pub. L. 105–277) requires 

Federal agencies to issue a Family 

Policymaking Assessment for any rule 

that may affect family well-being. This 

rule would not have any impact on the 

autonomy or integrity of the family as 

an institution. Accordingly, DOE has 

concluded that it is not necessary to 

prepare a Family Policymaking 

Assessment. 

I. Review Under Executive Order 12630 

DOE has determined, under Executive 

Order 12630, ‘‘Governmental Actions 

and Interference with Constitutionally 

Protected Property Rights,’’ 53 FR 8859 

(March 18, 1988), that this regulation 

would not result in any takings that 

might require compensation under the 

Fifth Amendment to the U.S. 

Constitution. 

J. Review Under the Treasury and 

General Government Appropriations 

Act, 2001 

Section 515 of the Treasury and 

General Government Appropriations 

Act, 2001 (44 U.S.C. 3516 note) provides 

for agencies to review most 

disseminations of information to the 

public under guidelines established by 

each agency pursuant to general 

guidelines issued by OMB. OMB’s 

guidelines were published at 67 FR 

8452 (Feb. 22, 2002), and DOE’s 

guidelines were published at 67 FR 

62446 (Oct. 7, 2002). DOE has reviewed 

today’s proposed rule under the OMB 

and DOE guidelines and has concluded 

that it is consistent with applicable 

policies in those guidelines. 

K. Review Under Executive Order 13211 

Executive Order 13211, ‘‘Actions 

Concerning Regulations That 

Significantly Affect Energy Supply, 

Distribution, or Use,’’ 66 FR 28355 (May 

22, 2001), requires Federal agencies to 

prepare and submit to OMB a Statement 

of Energy Effects for any proposed 

significant energy action. A ‘‘significant 

energy action’’ is defined as any action 

by an agency that promulgated or is 

expected to lead to promulgation of a 

final rule, and that: (1) Is a significant 

regulatory action under Executive Order 

12866, or any successor order; and (2) 

is likely to have a significant adverse 

effect on the supply, distribution, or use 

of energy; or (3) is designated by the 

Administrator of OIRA as a significant 

energy action. For any proposed 

significant energy action, the agency 

must give a detailed statement of any 

adverse effects on energy supply, 

distribution, or use should the proposal 

be implemented, and of reasonable 

alternatives to the action and their 

expected benefits on energy supply, 

distribution, and use. 

Today’s regulatory action to create the 

test procedures for measuring the energy 

efficiency of HID lamps is not a 

significant regulatory action under 

Executive Order 12866. Moreover, it 

would not have a significant adverse 

effect on the supply, distribution, or use 

of energy, nor has it been designated as 

a significant energy action by the 

Administrator of OIRA. Therefore, it is 

not a significant energy action, and, 

accordingly, DOE has not prepared a 

Statement of Energy Effects. 

L. Review Under Section 32 of the 

Federal Energy Administration Act of 

1974 

Under section 301 of the Department 

of Energy Organization Act (Pub. L. 95– 

91; 42 U.S.C. 7101), DOE must comply 

with section 32 of the Federal Energy 

Administration Act of 1974, as amended 

by the Federal Energy Administration 

Authorization Act of 1977. (15 U.S.C. 

788; FEAA) Section 32 essentially 

provides in relevant part that, where a 

proposed rule authorizes or requires use 

of commercial standards, the notice of 

proposed rulemaking must inform the 

public of the use and background of 

such standards. In addition, section 

32(c) requires DOE to consult with the 

Attorney General and the Chairman of 

the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) 

concerning the impact of the 

commercial or industry standards on 

competition. 

The proposed test procedures 

incorporate testing methods contained 

in the following commercial standards: 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS3

29656 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 99 / Thursday, May 22, 2014 / Proposed Rules 

1. ANSI C78.389–R2009, ‘‘American 

National Standard for Electric Lamps—High 

Intensity Discharge—Methods of Measuring 

Characteristics’’ (sections 1.0, 2.0, 3.0, and 

Figure 1); 

2. CIE 13.3–1995, ‘‘Technical Report: 

Method of Measuring and Specifying Colour 

Rendering Properties of Light Sources’’; 

3. CIE 15:2004, ‘‘Technical Report: 

Colorimetry’’; 

4. IES LM–51–13, ‘‘Approved Method for 

the Electrical and Photometric Measurements 

of High Intensity Discharge Lamps’’ (sections 

1.0, 5.2, 7.0, and 8.0); and 

5. IES LM–78–07, ‘‘IESNA Approved 

Method for Total Luminous Flux 

Measurement of Lamps Using an Integrating 

Sphere Photometer’’ (sections 3.1 and 6.3). 

DOE evaluated these standards and is 

unable to conclude whether they fully 

comply with the requirements of section 

32(b) of the Federal Energy 

Administration Act, (i.e., that they were 

developed in a manner that fully 

provides for public participation, 

comment, and review). Before 

prescribing a final rule, DOE will 

consult with the Attorney General and 

the Chairman of the FTC about the effect 

of these test procedures on competition. 

IV. Public Participation 

A. Submission of Comments 

DOE will accept comments, data, and 

information regarding this proposed 

rule no later than the date provided in 

the DATES section at the beginning of 

this proposed rule. Interested parties 

may submit comments using any of the 

methods described in the ADDRESSES

section at the beginning of this notice. 

Submitting comments via 

www.regulations.gov. The 

www.regulations.gov Web page will 

require you to provide your name and 

contact information. Your contact 

information will be viewable to DOE 

Building Technologies staff only. Your 

contact information will not be publicly 

viewable except for your first and last 

names, organization name (if any), and 

submitter representative name (if any). 

If your comment is not processed 

properly because of technical 

difficulties, DOE will use this 

information to contact you. If DOE 

cannot read your comment due to 

technical difficulties and cannot contact 

you for clarification, DOE may not be 

able to consider your comment. 

However, your contact information 

will be publicly viewable if you include 

it in the comment or in any documents 

attached to your comment. Any 

information that you do not want to be 

publicly viewable should not be 

included in your comment, nor in any 

document attached to your comment. 

Otherwise, persons viewing comments 

will see only first and last names, 

organization names, correspondence 

containing comments, and any 

documents submitted with the 

comments. 

Do not submit to www.regulations.gov 

information for which disclosure is 

restricted by statute, such as trade 

secrets and commercial or financial 

information (hereinafter referred to as 

Confidential Business Information 

(CBI)). Comments submitted through 

regulations.gov cannot be claimed as 

CBI. Comments received through 

www.regulations.gov will waive any CBI 

claims for the information submitted. 

For information on submitting CBI, see 

the Confidential Business Information 

section. 

DOE processes submissions made 

through www.regulations.gov before 

posting. Normally, comments will be 

posted within a few days of being 

submitted. However, if large volumes of 

comments are being processed 

simultaneously, your comment may not 

be viewable for up to several weeks. 

Please keep the comment tracking 

number that www.regulations.gov 

provides after you have successfully 

uploaded your comment. 

Submitting comments via email, hand 

delivery/courier, or mail. Comments and 

documents submitted via email, hand 

delivery/courier, or mail also will be 

posted to www.regulations.gov. If you 

do not want your personal contact 

information to be publicly viewable, do 

not include it in your comment or any 

accompanying documents. Instead, 

provide your contact information in a 

cover letter. Include your first and last 

names, email address, telephone 

number, and optional mailing address. 

The cover letter will not be publicly 

viewable as long as it does not include 

any comments 

Include contact information each time 

you submit comments, data, documents, 

and other information to DOE. If you 

submit via mail or hand delivery/

courier, please provide all items on a 

CD, if feasible, in which case it is not 

necessary to submit printed copies. No 

facsimiles (faxes) will be accepted. 

Comments, data, and other 

information submitted to DOE 

electronically should be provided in 

PDF (preferred), Microsoft Word or 

Excel, WordPerfect, or text (ASCII) file 

format. Provide documents that are not 

secured, written in English, and free of 

any defects or viruses. Documents 

should not contain special characters or 

any form of encryption and, if possible, 

they should carry the electronic 

signature of the author. 

Campaign form letters. Please submit 

campaign form letters by the originating 

organization in batches of between 50 to 

500 form letters per PDF or as one form 

letter with a list of supporters’ names 

compiled into one or more PDFs. This 

reduces comment processing and 

posting time. 

Confidential Business Information. 

Pursuant to 10 CFR 1004.11, any person 

submitting information that he or she 

believes to be confidential and exempt 

by law from public disclosure should 

submit via email, postal mail, or hand 

delivery/courier two well-marked 

copies: one copy of the document 

marked ‘‘confidential,’’ including all the 

information believed to be confidential, 

and one copy of the document marked 

‘‘non-confidential,’’ with the 

information believed to be confidential 

deleted. Submit these documents via 

email or on a CD, if feasible. DOE will 

make its own determination about the 

confidential status of the information 

and treat it according to its 

determination. 

Factors of interest to DOE when 

evaluating requests to treat submitted 

information as confidential include: (1) 

A description of the items; (2) whether 

and why such items are customarily 

treated as confidential within the 

industry; (3) whether the information is 

generally known by or available from 

other sources; (4) whether the 

information has previously been made 

available to others without obligation 

concerning its confidentiality; (5) an 

explanation of the competitive injury to 

the submitting person which would 

result from public disclosure; (6) when 

such information might lose its 

confidential character due to the 

passage of time; and (7) why disclosure 

of the information would be contrary to 

the public interest. 

It is DOE’s policy that all comments 

may be included in the public docket, 

without change and as received, 

including any personal information 

provided in the comments (except 

information deemed to be exempt from 

public disclosure). 

B. Issues on Which DOE Seeks Comment 

DOE requests comments and data on 

the HID lamp test procedures proposed 

in this SNOPR. Although comments are 

welcome on all aspects of this 

rulemaking, DOE is particularly 

interested in comments on the 

following: 

1. Definitions 

DOE seeks comments on all of the 

proposed definitions in this SNOPR. 

a. Beam Angle 

DOE requests comments on its 

proposal to withdraw the December 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS3

Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 99 / Thursday, May 22, 2014 / Proposed Rules 29657 

2011 TP NOPR proposed definition of 

‘‘beam angle.’’ 

b. Color Rendering Index 

DOE requests comments on its 

proposal to retain the December 2011 

TP NOPR proposed definition of ‘‘color 

rendering index.’’ 

c. Correlated Color Temperature 

DOE requests comments on its 

proposal to retain the December 2011 

TP NOPR proposed definition of 

‘‘correlated color temperature.’’ 

d. Directional Lamp 

DOE requests comments on its 

proposal to revise the December 2011 

TP NOPR proposed definition of 

‘‘directional lamp.’’ 

e. High-Pressure Sodium Lamp 

DOE requests comments on its 

proposal to retain the December 2011 

TP NOPR proposed definition of ‘‘highpressure sodium lamp.’’ 

f. Initial lumen output 

DOE requests comments on its 

proposal to add a definition for ‘‘initial 

lumen output.’’ 

g. Lamp Efficacy 

DOE requests comments on its 

proposal to revise the December 2011 

TP NOPR proposed definition for ‘‘lamp 

efficacy.’’ 

h. Lamp Electrical Power Input 

DOE requests comments on its 

proposal to withdraw the December 

2011 TP NOPR proposed definition of 

‘‘lamp electrical power input.’’ 

i. Lamp Wattage 

DOE requests comments on its 

proposal to revise the December 2011 

TP NOPR proposed definition of ‘‘lamp 

wattage.’’ 

j. Lumen Maintenance 

DOE requests comments on its 

proposal to withdraw the December 

2011 TP NOPR proposed definition of 

‘‘lumen maintenance.’’ 

k. Mercury Vapor Lamp 

DOE requests comments on its 

proposal to retain the December 2011 

TP NOPR definition of ‘‘mercury vapor 

lamp.’’ 

l. Metal Halide Lamp 

DOE requests comments on its 

proposal to retain the December 2011 

TP NOPR definition of ‘‘metal halide 

lamp.’’ 

m. Rated Luminous Flux or Lumen 

Output 

DOE requests comments on its 

proposal to withdraw December 2011 

TP NOPR definition for ‘‘rated luminous 

flux or lumen output.’’ 

n. Self-Ballasted Lamp 

DOE requests comments on its 

proposal to retain the December 2011 

TP NOPR definition for ‘‘self-ballasted 

lamp.’’ 

o. Ballast Efficiency 

DOE requests comments on its 

proposal to retain the definition of 

‘‘ballast efficiency’’ for high-intensity 

discharge fixtures, currently set forth at 

10 CFR 431.322. 

p. Basic Model 

DOE requests comments on its 

proposal to revise the December 2011 

TP NOPR definition of ‘‘basic model.’’ 

2. Ambient Test Temperature 

DOE requests comments on retaining 

the December 2011 TP NOPR proposed 

ambient test temperature requirements 

(25 °C ±5 °C) based on IES LM–51–13. 

3. Air Speed 

DOE requests comments on its 

proposal to eliminate the December 

2011 TP NOPR proposed specific air 

speed requirements. 

4. Reference Ballasts 

DOE requests comments on its 

proposed approach for testing HID 

lamps for which there are no ANSI 

reference ballasts. 

5. Instrumentation for Photometric 

Measurement 

DOE requests comments on its 

proposal to incorporate by reference 

sections 3.1 and 6.3 of LM–78–07, and 

add related text that references LM–78– 

07 guidance on integrating sphere 

measurement errors and corrections. 

6. Sampling Plan 

DOE requests comments on its 

proposed sampling plan as summarized 

and discussed in section II.C.1.c, 

especially regarding sample size (21 

units for lamp efficacy and correlated 

color temperature), statistical 

representation (confidence intervals of 

90 percent for MH lamps, and 99 

percent for HPS and MV lamps), and 

divisor (0.97). 

7. Lamp Seasoning and Stabilization 

DOE requests comments on its 

proposed requirement that HID lamps 

with no specified operating position 

(including universal position lamps) be 

operated in the vertical base-up 

orientation for seasoning and 

stabilization purposes. 

8. Cool-Down and Re-Stabilization 

DOE requests comments on its 

proposed cool-down and re-stabilization 

requirements. 

9. Lamp Orientation 

DOE requests comments on its 

proposed requirement that HID lamps 

with no specified operating position 

(including universal position lamps) be 

tested in the vertical base up position. 

10. Special Consideration for 

Directional Lamps 

DOE requests comments on its 

proposal to exclude directional lamp 

testing in this SNOPR. 

11. Efficacy 

DOE requests comments on its 

proposed method of calculating HID 

lamp efficacy and reporting efficacy to 

the nearest tenth of a lumen per watt. 

12. Measurement and Calculation of 

Correlated Color Temperature and Color 

Rendering Index 

DOE requests comments on its 

proposed measurement methods for 

color characteristics (CCT and CRI). 

13. Dimming 

DOE requests comments on its 

proposal that eliminates testing HID 

lamps in a dimmed state. 

14. Small Business Burden 

DOE requests comment on its 

determination that it could not certify 

that the proposed rule, if promulgated, 

would not have a significant impact on 

a substantial number of small entities. 

DOE also seeks comment on the 

methodologies and data used to reach 

this determination. 

15. Basic Model Introduction and 

Modification 

DOE requests comment on the 

expected frequency of introductions of 

new basic models and the average 

number of years a basic model remains 

unmodified to potentially better 

determine the potential effects of this 

rule on small businesses. 

V. Approval of the Office of the 

Secretary 

The Secretary of Energy has approved 

publication of this supplemental notice 

of proposed rulemaking. 

List of Subjects 

10 CFR Part 429 

Administrative practice and 

procedure, Buildings and facilities, 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS3

29658 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 99 / Thursday, May 22, 2014 / Proposed Rules 

Business and industry, Energy 

conservation, Grants programs—energy, 

Housing, Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements, Technical assistance. 

10 CFR Part 431 

Administrative practice and 

procedure, Confidential business 

information, Energy conservation, 

Household appliances, Imports, 

Incorporation by reference, Reporting 

and recordkeeping requirements, Small 

business. 

Issued in Washington, DC, on May 5, 2014. 

Kathleen B. Hogan, 

Deputy Assistant Secretary for Energy 

Efficiency, Energy Efficiency and Renewable 

Energy. 

For the reasons stated in the 

preamble, DOE proposes to amend parts 

429 and 431 of chapter II of title 10, 

Code of Federal Regulations as set forth 

below. 

PART 429—CERTIFICATION, 

COMPLIANCE, AND ENFORCEMENT 

FOR CONSUMER PRODUCTS AND 

COMMERCIAL AND INDUSTRIAL 

EQUIPMENT 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 429 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 6291–6317. 

■ 2. Section 429.11 is revised to read as 

follows: 

§ 429.11 General sampling requirements 

for selecting units to be tested. 

(a) When testing of covered products 

or covered equipment is required to 

comply with section 323(c) of the Act, 

or to comply with rules prescribed 

under sections 324, 325, or 342, 344, 

345, or 346 of the Act, a sample 

composed of production units (or units 

representative of production units) of 

the basic model being tested must be 

selected at random and tested, and must 

meet the criteria found in §§ 429.14 

through 429.55 of this subpart. 

Components of similar design may be 

substituted without additional testing if 

the substitution does not affect energy 

or water consumption. Any represented 

values of energy efficiency, water 

efficiency, energy consumption, or 

water consumption for all individual 

models represented by a given basic 

model must be the same. 

(b) Unless otherwise specified, the 

minimum number of units tested must 

be no less than two (except where a 

different minimum limit is specified in 

§§ 429.14 through 429.55 of this 

subpart). 

■ 3. Section 429.55 is added to read as 

follows: 

§ 429.55 High-intensity discharge (HID) 

lamps. 

(a) Sampling plan for selection of 

units for testing. (1) The requirements of 

§ 429.11 are applicable to high-intensity 

discharge (HID) lamps. HID lamps 

include high-pressure sodium (HPS), 

mercury vapor (MV), and metal halide 

(MH) lamps. 

(2)(i) For each basic model of HID 

lamp, a sample of sufficient size, but not 

less than 21 units, shall be randomly 

selected and tested to ensure that—any 

represented value of lamp efficacy of a 

basic model shall be less than or equal 

to the lower of: 

(A) The mean of the sample, 

Where: 

x ̄ is the sample mean, 

n is the number of samples, and 

xi is the ith sample; 

Or, 

(B) The lower confidence limit (LCL) 

of the true mean divided by 0.97, 

Where: 

x ̄ is the sample mean, 

s is the sample standard deviation, 

n is the number of samples, and 

t is the t statistic for a 90-percent one-tailed 

confidence interval with n-1 degrees of 

freedom (from appendix A) for MH 

lamps, and the t statistic for a 99-percent 

one-tailed confidence interval with n-1 

degrees of freedom (from appendix A) for 

HPS and MV lamps. 

(ii) For each basic model of HID lamp, 

the correlated color temperature (CCT) 

must be measured from the same lamps 

selected for the lamp efficacy 

measurements in paragraph (a)(2)(i) of 

this section (i.e., the manufacturer must 

measure all lamps for lumens, input 

power, and CCT). The CCT must be 

represented as the mean of a minimum 

sample of 21 lamps, 

Where: 

x ̄ is the sample mean, 

n is the number of samples, and 

xi is the ith sample. 

(b) Certification reports. [Reserved] 

PART 431—ENERGY EFFICIENCY 

PROGRAM FOR CERTAIN 

COMMERCIAL AND INDUSTRIAL 

EQUIPMENT 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 431 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 6291–6317. 

■ 2. Subpart 431.2 is amended by 

adding in alphabetical order, definitions 

for ‘‘ballast’’, ‘‘high-intensity discharge 

lamp’’, ‘‘high-pressure sodium (HPS) 

lamp’’, ‘‘mercury vapor lamp’’, and 

‘‘metal halide lamp’’ to read as follows: 

§ 431.2 Definitions. 

* * * * * 

Ballast means a device used with an 

electric discharge lamp to obtain 

necessary circuit conditions (voltage, 

current, and waveform) for starting and 

operating. 

* * * * * 

High-intensity discharge lamp means 

an electric-discharge lamp in which— 

(1) The light-producing arc is 

stabilized by the arc tube wall 

temperature; and 

(2) The arc tube wall loading is in 

excess of 3 watts/cm2, including such 

lamps that are high-pressure sodium, 

mercury vapor, and metal halide lamps. 

High-pressure sodium (HPS) lamp 

means a high-intensity discharge lamp 

in which the major portion of the light 

is produced by radiation from sodium 

vapor operating at a partial pressure of 

about 6,670 pascals (approximately 

0.066 atmospheres or 50 Torr) or greater. 

* * * * * 

Mercury vapor lamp means a highintensity discharge lamp, including 

clear, phosphor-coated, and selfballasted screw base lamps, in which 

the major portion of the light is 

produced by radiation from mercury 

typically operating at a partial vapor 

pressure in excess of 100,000 Pa 

(approximately 1 atm). 

Metal halide lamp means a highintensity discharge lamp in which the 

major portion of the light is produced by 

radiation of metal halides and their 

products of dissociation, possibly in 

combination with metallic vapors. 

* * * * * 

§ 431.282 [Amended] 

■ 3. Section 431.282 is amended by 

removing the definitions of ‘‘ballast’’, 

‘‘high intensity discharge lamp’’, and 

‘‘mercury vapor lamp’’. 

§ 431.322 [Amended] 

■ 4. Section 431.322 is amended by 

removing the definitions of ‘‘ballast’’ 

and ‘‘metal halide lamp.’’ 

■ 5. Subpart Y is added to read as 

follows: 


mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS3EP22MY14.005</GPH> EP22MY14.006</GPH> EP22MY14.007</GPH>
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 99 / Thursday, May 22, 2014 / Proposed Rules 29659 

Subpart Y—High-Intensity Discharge 

Lamps 

Sec. 

431.451 Purpose and scope. 

431.452 Definitions concerning highintensity discharge lamps. 

431.453 Materials incorporated by 

reference. 

431.454 Uniform test method for 

calculation of lamp efficacy and color 

characteristics. 

431.455 [Reserved]. 

§ 431.451 Purpose and scope. 

This subpart sets forth energy 

conservation requirements for highintensity discharge lamps, pursuant to 

Parts A and A–1 of Title III of the 

Energy Policy and Conservation Act, as 

amended, and 42 U.S.C. 6291, et al. 

§ 431.452 Definitions concerning highintensity discharge lamps. 

Basic model means all units of a given 

type of covered equipment (or class 

thereof) manufactured by one 

manufacturer, that have the same 

primary energy source, and that have 

essentially identical electrical, physical, 

and functional characteristics that affect 

energy consumption or efficacy. 

Color rendering index or CRI means 

the measure of the degree of color shift 

objects undergo when illuminated by a 

light source as compared with the color 

of those same objects when illuminated 

by a reference source of comparable 

color temperature. 

Correlated color temperature means 

the absolute temperature of a blackbody 

whose chromaticity most nearly 

resembles that of the light source. 

Directional lamp means a lamp with 

an integral reflector, emitting at least 80 

percent of its light output within a solid 

angle of p steradians (corresponding to 

a cone with an angle of 120 degrees). 

Initial lumen output means the 

measured lumen output after the lamp 

is seasoned, then initially energized and 

stabilized, using the lamp seasoning and 

stabilization procedures in 10 CFR 

431.454(b)(1). 

Lamp efficacy means the lumen 

output of a lamp divided by its wattage, 

expressed in lumens per watt (LPW). 

Lamp wattage means the total 

electrical power consumed by a lamp in 

watts, after the initial seasoning period 

referenced in section 6.2.1 of IES LM– 

51–13. 

Self-ballasted lamp means a lamp 

unit that incorporates all elements that 

are necessary for the starting and stable 

operation of the lamp in a permanent 

enclosure and that does not include any 

replaceable or interchangeable parts. 

§ 431.453 Materials incorporated by 

reference. 

(a) General. DOE incorporates by 

reference the following standards into 

subpart Y of part 431. The material 

listed has been approved for 

incorporation by reference by the 

Director of the Federal Register in 

accordance with 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 

CFR part 51. Any subsequent 

amendment to a standard by the 

standard-setting organization will not 

affect the DOE regulations unless and 

until amended by DOE. Material is 

incorporated as it exists on the date of 

the approval, and a notice of any change 

in the material will be published in the 

Federal Register. All approved material 

is available for inspection at the 

National Archives and Records 

Administration (NARA). For 

information on the availability of this 

material at NARA, call 202–741–6030 or 

go to www.archives.gov/federal_register/ 

code_of_federal_regulations/ibr_

locations.html. Also, this material is 

available for inspection at U.S. 

Department of Energy, Office of Energy 

Efficiency and Renewable Energy, 

Building Technologies Program, 6th 

Floor, 950 L’Enfant Plaza SW., 

Washington, DC 20024, 202–586–2945. 

Standards can be obtained from the 

sources listed as follows. 

(b) ANSI. American National 

Standards Institute, 25 W. 43rd Street, 

4th Floor, New York, NY 10036, 212– 

642–4900, or go to www.ansi.org. 

(1) ANSI C78.389–2004 (R2009) 

(‘‘ANSI C78.389’’), American National 

Standard for Electric Lamps—High 

Intensity Discharge—Methods of 

Measuring Characteristics, approved 

August 9, 2009, IBR approved for 

§ 431.454. 

(b) [Reserved]. 

(c) CIE. International Commission on 

Illumination (Commission 

Internationale de l’Eclairage) Central 

Bureau, Kegelgasse 27, A–1030, Vienna, 

Austria, 011+43 1 714 31 87 0, or go to 

www.cie.co.at. 

(1) CIE 13.3–1995 (‘‘CIE 13.3–1995’’), 

Technical Report: Method of Measuring 

and Specifying Colour Rendering 

Properties of Light Sources, 1995. IBR 

approved for § 431.454. 

(2) CIE 15:2004 (‘‘CIE 15–2004’’), 

Technical Report: Colorimetry, 2004. 

IBR approved for § 431.454. 

(d) IES. Illuminating Engineering 

Society of North America, 120 Wall 

Street, Floor 17, New York, NY 10005– 

4001, 212–248–5000, or go to 

www.iesna.org. 

(1) IES LM–51–13 (‘‘LM–51–13’’), 

Approved Method for the Electrical and 

Photometric Measurements of High 

Intensity Discharge Lamps, 2013. IBR 

approved for § 431.454. 

(2) IES LM–78–07 (‘‘LM–78–07’’), 

IESNA Approved Method for Total 

Luminous Flux Measurement of Lamps 

Using an Integrating Sphere Photometer, 

2007. IBR approved for § 431.454. 

§ 431.454 Uniform test method for 

calculation of lamp efficacy and color 

characteristics. 

Note: After [DATE 180 DAYS AFTER 

PUBLICATION OF TEST PROCEDURE 

FINAL RULE IN THE Federal Register], any 

representations made with respect to the 

efficacy, CCT, or CRI of HID lamps must be 

made in accordance with the results of 

testing pursuant to this test procedure. 

(a) Test setup and conditions. (1) 

Ambient conditions. The ambient 

conditions must be established in 

accordance with the specifications in 

section 4.0 of IES LM–51 (incorporated 

by reference; see § 431.453). 

(2) Power supply characteristics. The 

power supply characteristics must be 

established in accordance with section 

3.2 of ANSI C78.389 (incorporated by 

reference; see § 431.453). 

(3) Reference ballasts. For HID lamp 

testing, the reference ballast used must 

meet the requirements of ANSI C78.389. 

For HID lamp measurements (electrical 

and photometric), the tested lamps must 

be operated with a reference ballast with 

the matching ANSI rating or a reference 

ballast with variable impedance that can 

be set to match each lamp type to be 

tested. The reference ballast must have 

the impedance and the electrical 

characteristics required by ANSI for the 

lamp being tested. If electrical readings 

are to be taken on a lamp for which no 

ANSI standard exists, that lamp must be 

tested on a reference ballast with 

specifications that match the 

manufacturer specifications for the lamp 

such as those provided in a catalog or 

for marketing purposes online but not 

those provided for specific or limited 

uses, such as specifically for testing. If 

electrical readings are to be taken on a 

multi-start metal halide lamp, the lamp 

must be tested on a reference ballast 

with the characteristics defined in the 

equivalent probe-start ANSI lamp 

designation as listed in the lamp catalog 

or manufacturer data sheets with the 

lowest ANSI lamp designation. If no 

probe-start ANSI lamp designation is 

listed by the manufacturer, then the 

lamp must be tested on a reference 

ballast with the characteristics defined 

in the lowest ANSI lamp designation 

listed. 

(4) Electrical instrumentation. 

Instrumentation for electrical 

measurements must meet the 

requirements of section 3.8 of ANSI 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS3

29660 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 99 / Thursday, May 22, 2014 / Proposed Rules 

C78.389 (incorporated by reference, see 

§ 431.453). 

(5) Photometric instrumentation. 

Instrumentation for photometric 

measurements must meet the 

requirements of section 7.0 of IES LM– 

51, and sections 3.0 and 6.3 of IES LM– 

78 (incorporated by reference, see 

§ 431.453). 

(b) Lamp preparation. (1) Lamp 

seasoning and stabilization. The HID 

lamp must be seasoned for 100 hours 

per section 6.2.1 of IES LM–51 

(incorporated by reference, see 

§ 431.453). During the seasoning period, 

the lamp must be operated in the same 

orientation in which it will be tested for 

lamp efficacy. HID lamps with no 

specified operating position (including 

universal lamps) must be operated in 

the vertical base-up orientation for 

seasoning and stabilization. After this 

one-time seasoning process, a lamp 

being tested must achieve stable 

operation, prior to any measurements, 

using the lamp stabilization method 

specified in section 3.7 of ANSI C78.389 

(incorporated by reference, see 

§ 431.453). As detailed in ANSI 

C78.389, HID lamp stabilization 

requirements vary with lamp 

technology. Table I lists the lamp warmup, stabilization, and re-stabilization 

requirements for MV, HPS, and MH 

lamps. 

TABLE I—HID LAMP WARM-UP AND STABILIZATION CRITERIA

Lamp type Lamp warm-up time Stabilization criteria 

MV ........................................ 15–20 minutes ................................................................. 3 successive measurements (voltage and current). 

5-minute measurement intervals. 

Change in value <1.0%.*

HPS ...................................... 1 hour .............................................................................. 3 successive measurements (voltage and current). 

10- to 15-minute measurement intervals. 

Change in value <1.0%.*

MH ........................................ 6 hours Operated within ±10% rated wattage ................ 3 successive measurements (voltage and current). 

10- to 15-minute measurement intervals. 

Change in value <3.0%.**

* This is determined by measurement(n∂1)/measurementn, where the resultant value needs to be less than 101% and greater than 99% for the 

lamp to be considered stabilized. 

** This is determined by measurement(n∂1)/measurementn, where the resultant value needs to be less than 103% and greater than 97% for 

the lamp to be considered stabilized. 

(2) Lamp/circuit transfer. Lamp 

transfer and re-stabilization must be 

conducted according to section 3.7 of 

ANSI C78.389 (incorporated by 

reference, see § 431.453). Lamps may 

either be operated continuously and 

moved into the integrating sphere or 

extinguished and relocated. If the lamp 

is not-extinguished prior to transfer, the 

lamp must be stabilized prior to 

measurement. If the lamp is 

extinguished and transferred, the lamp 

cool-down and transfer must adhere to 

the requirements shown in Table II. The 

requirements vary with HID lamp type, 

as well as with the specifics of the lamp 

movement. 

TABLE II—LAMP COOL-DOWN AND RE-STABILIZATION REQUIREMENTS

Lamp type Cooling requirement Re-stabilization time 

MV ........................................ None ................................................................................ Reconfirm stabilized operations upon transfer/restrike. 

HPS ...................................... If extinguished, allow to cool for 1 hour minimum before 

relocating.

Reconfirm stabilized operations upon transfer/restrike. 

MH ........................................ If extinguished, cool to below 60 °C if relocating ........... No relocation and no reorientation—30 minutes. 

Relocation with no reorientation—30 minutes. 

Reorientation—6 hours. 

(3) Lamp orientation. Lamp 

orientation requirements are those 

specified in section 3.6 of ANSI C78.389 

(incorporated by reference, see 

§ 431.453). A lamp marked or otherwise 

designated for use in a specific 

operating position must be tested in that 

position. If no operating position is 

specified or the lamp is marked 

‘‘universal,’’ the lamp must be operated 

in the vertical base-up position. 

(c) Test measurements and 

calculations. Test measurements and 

calculations must be carried out in 

accordance with the test conditions, 

setup, and lamp preparation 

requirements of § 431.454(a)–(b). 

(1) Measurement and calculation of 

lamp efficacy. (i) Measure the initial 

lumen output as specified in section 7.0 

of IES LM–51 (incorporated by 

reference, see § 431.453). 

(ii) Measure the input power in watts 

as specified in sections 3.5, 3.9, and 

3.10 of ANSI C78.389 (incorporated by 

reference, see § 431.453). If a voltmeter 

and ammeter are used for 

measurements, multiply the measured 

voltage and current values. 

(iii) HID lamp efficacy must be 

calculated as the value from (c)(1)(i) 

divided by the value from (c)(1)(ii) of 

this section, with the resulting quotient 

rounded off to the nearest tenth of a 

lumen per watt. 

(2) Measurement and calculation of 

correlated color temperature and color 

rendering index. (i) Determine HID lamp 

CCT using the methods for 

measurement and characterizing color 

set forth in CIE 15 (incorporated by 

reference, see § 431.453). The CCT value 

must be rounded to the nearest 10 

kelvins. 

(ii) Determine HID lamp CRI using the 

methods for measurement and 

characterizing color set forth in CIE 15 

and CIE 13.3 (incorporated by reference, 

see § 431.453). Measure HID lamp CRI if 

necessary to determine whether a lamp 

is subject to standards based on its CRI 

as specified in § 431.455. The CRI must 

be rounded to the nearest whole 

number. 

§ 431.455 [Reserved]. 

[FR Doc. 2014–10683 Filed 5–21–14; 8:45 a.m.] 

BILLING CODE 6450–01–P 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS3