### CHAPTER 5. LIFE-CYCLE COST ANALYSIS AND PAYBACK PERIOD ANALYSIS

TABLE OF CONTENTS

5.1 METHOD AND DAT A

...................................................................................................... 5-1 5.1.1 Annual Operating Hours

...................................................................................... 5-3 5.1.2 Lamp Prices

......................................................................................................... 5-3 5.1.3 Ballast Prices

........................................................................................................ 5-5 5.1.4 Luminaire Prices

.................................................................................................. 5-7 5.1.5 Lamp Lifetime

..................................................................................................... 5-8 5.1.6 Ballast Lifetime

.................................................................................................. 5-10 5.1.7 Contractor Mark-Up

........................................................................................... 5-10 5.1.8 Sales Tax

............................................................................................................ 5-10 5.1.9 Maintenance Costs

............................................................................................. 5-10 5.1.10 Electricity Price

.................................................................................................. 5-12 5.1.11 Discount Rate

..................................................................................................... 5-12 5.2 RESULTS FOR MEDIUM-WATTAGE MERCURY VAPOR DESIGN OPTIONS

..... 5-12 5.2.1 Event 1 – Lamp-Only Replacement

................................................................... 5-12 5.2.2 Event 1b – Lamp-Only Replacement

................................................................. 5-14 5.3 RESULTS FOR MEDIUM-WATTAGE PROBE-START METAL HALIDE DESIGN OPTIONS

....................................................................................................................... ... 5-15 5.3.1 Event 1 – Lamp-Only Replacement

................................................................... 5-15 5.3.2 Event 1b – Lamp/Fixture Replacement

............................................................. 5-17 5.3.3 Event 2 – New Construction / Luminaire Replacement

.................................... 5-18

5-i

### LIST OF TABLES

Table 5.1.1. Lamp Prices from 2008 RS-Means.......................................................................... 5-3 Table 5.1.2. Municipal Lamp Prices............................................................................................ 5-4 Table 5.1.3. Lamp Price derived from Online Distributor Websites ........................................... 5-5 Table 5.1.4. Lamp Price derived from Online Distributor Websites ........................................... 5-6 Table 5.1.5. Prices from 2008 RS-Means for High -Intensity Discharge Luminaires .................. 5-7 Table 5.1.6. Lamp Price derived from Online Distributor Websites ........................................... 5-8 Table 5.1.7. Lamp Life Data (175-Wa tt Mercury Vapor Baseline)............................................. 5-8 Table 5.1.8. Lamp Life Data (250-Wa tt Mercury Vapor Baseline)............................................. 5-9 Table 5.1.9. Lamp Life Data (400-Wa tt Mercury Vapor Baseline)............................................. 5-9 Table 5.1.10. Lamp Life Data (175-Watt Baseline) .................................................................... 5-9 Table 5.1.11. Lamp Life Data (250-Wa tt Metal Halide Baseline) .............................................. 5-9 Table 5.1.12. Lamp Life Data (360-Watt Baseline) .................................................................... 5-9 Table 5.1.13. Lamp Life Data (400-Watt Baseline) .................................................................... 5-9 Table 5.2.1. Life-Cycle Cost-Payback Period Analysis for 175-Watt Mercury Vapor Baseline5-13 Table 5.2.2. Life-Cycle Cost-Payback Period Analysis for 250-Watt Mercury Vapor Baseline5-13 Table 5.2.3. Life-Cycle Cost-Payback Period Analysis for 400-Watt Mercury Vapor Baseline5-13 Table 5.2.4. Life-Cycle Cost-Payback Period Analysis for 175-Watt Mercury Vapor Baseline5-14 Table 5.2.5. Life-Cycle Cost-Payback Period Analysis for 250-Watt Mercury Vapor Baseline5-14 Table 5.2.6. Life-Cycle Cost-Payback Period Analysis for 400-Watt Mercury Vapor Baseline5-15 Table 5.3.1. Life-Cycle Cost-Payback Period Analysis for 175-Watt Metal Halide Baseline.. 5-15 Table 5.3.2. Life-Cycle Cost-Payback Period Analysis for 250-Watt Metal Halide Baseline.. 5-16 Table 5.3.3. Life-Cycle Cost-Payback Period Analysis for 360-Watt Metal Halide Baseline.. 5-16 Table 5.3.4. Life-Cycle Cost-Payback Period Analysis for 400-Watt Metal Halide Baseline.. 5-16 Table 5.3.5. Life-Cycle Cost-Payback Period Analysis for 175-Watt Metal Halide Baseline.. 5-17 Table 5.3.6. Life-Cycle Cost-Payback Period Analysis for 250-Watt Metal Halide Baseline.. 5-17 Table 5.3.7. Life-Cycle Cost-Payback Period Analysis for 360-Watt Metal Halide Baseline.. 5-18 Table 5.3.8. Life-Cycle Cost-Payback Period Analysis for 400-Watt Metal Halide Baseline.. 5-18 Table 5.3.9. Life-Cycle Cost-Payback Period Analysis for 175-Watt Metal Halide Baseline.. 5-19 Table 5.3.10. Life-Cycle Cost-Payback Period Analysis for 250-Watt Metal Halide Baseline 5-19 Table 5.3.11. Life-Cycle Cost-Payback Period Analysis for 360-Watt Metal Halide Baseline 5-19 Table 5.3.12. Life-Cycle Cost-Payback Period Analysis for 400-Watt Metal Halide Baseline 5-20

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 5.1.1. Flow Diagram of Inputs for th e Determination of LCC and PBP .......................... 5-2 Figure 5.1.2. Lamp Wattage/Price Comparison........................................................................... 5-4 Figure 5.1.3. Ballast Prices .................................................................................................. ........ 5-6 Figure 5.1.4. Lamp Wattage/Luminaire Price Comparison ......................................................... 5-7

5-ii

### CHAPTER 5. LIFE-CYCLE COST ANALYSIS AND PAYBACK PERIOD ANALYSIS

5.1 METHOD AND DATA

To assess the life-cycle cost (LCC) to end us ers of designs that improve lamp efficacy, the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) conducted an analysis that compares the incremental first cost to the value of electricity savings. In particular, the LCC analysis compares the incremental first cost to the discounted value of electricity savings over the life of the lamp system. The LCC is defined by the following equation:

N 

### OC  RC LCC  FC  

#  t t 

### Eq. 5-1

t  1 

### (1  r ) t



### Where:

LCC = life-cycle cost ($), FC = total first cost ($), N = analysis period, ∑ = sum over the analysis period, from year 1 to year N
, OC = operating cost ($), RC = lamp replacement cost ($),

r

= discount rate, and

t = year for which operating cost, repl acement cost, or disposal cost is determined.

The payback period (PBP) is time it takes the consumer to recover the assumed higher purchase cost of a more energy-efficient product as a result of lower operating costs. Numerically, the PBP is the ratio of the increase in purchase cost ( i.e. , from a less efficient design to a more efficient desi gn) to the decrease in annual operating expenditures. This type of calculation is known as a “simple” PBP because it doe s not account for changes in operating cost over time or the time value of money. That is, the calculation is done at an effective discount rate of 0 percent. The equation for PBP is:



IC PBP  

### Eq. 5-2  O C



### Where:

PBP = payback period (years), ∆ IC = difference in the total installed cost between the more efficacious standard level; equipment (efficacy levels 1, 2, etc.) and base line (efficacy level 0) equipment, and 

## ∆ OC = difference in annual operating costs.

DOE expresses all the costs in its LCC and PBP analyses in 2010$.

5-1

### As illustrated in Figure 5.1.1, the LCC and PBP analyses require multiple inputs, with the following addressed in detail in th is technical support document (TSD):

1. Typical annual operating hours, 2. Typical price for the lamp and new luminaire, 3. Typical lamp lifetime, 4. Typical ballast lifetime, 5. Contractor mark-up, 6. Sales tax, 7. Typical maintenance costs, 8. Electricity price, and 9. Discount rate (to convert fu ture operating cost savings into present value terms).

Figure 5.1.1. Flow Diagram of Inputs for the Determination of Life-Cycle Cost and Payback Period

5-2

### 5.1.1 Annual Operating Hours

High-intensity discharge (HID) lamps were assumed to operate in both exterior and interior environments, with the fo llowing assumed ope rating schedules.

 Annual use, exterior applications: 4,200 hours

 Annual use, interior applications: 5,840 hours

The exterior operating hours were derived by assuming that the luminaire is controlled by a photocell and operates roughly from dusk to dawn. This translates to roughly 4,200 hours annually, 1 

### based on a typical operation of 11.5 hours pe r day. The interior operating hours value was derived from published researc h, as reported in three different documents focusing on highbay luminaires. Reported operating peri ods ranged between 5,000 and 6,000 hours, 2,3 

### with one document specifically citing 16 hours per day as typical operation. 4 

### DOE’s assumed operation of 16 hours per day (5,840 hours per year) is in line with surveyed research, as well as the 2004 draft report, which used a value of 5,080 hours per year. 5



### 5.1.2 Lamp Prices

Published prices for lighting equipment va ry widely depending on their source. DOE surveyed several typical pricing data sources in developing representative prices for HID lamps in this determination.

First, DOE reviewed a commonly cited construction estimation reference book from RSMeans, Building Construction Cost Data (RSMeans). 6 

### Table 5.1.1 presents HID lamp prices from the 2008 version.

Table 5.1.1. Lamp Prices from 2008 RSMeans MV* Lamps MH** Lamps HPS † Lamps Lamp Power

watts (W) Price $ Lamp Power W Price $ Lamp Power W Price $

--- --- --- --- 70 $44.50 100 $31.00 --- --- --- ---

--- --- 175 $38.25 --- --- 250 $41.25 --- --- 250 $50.50 400 $33.00 400 $41.00 400 $52.00 1000 $77.25 1000 $99.00 1000 $143.00

* MV = mercury vapor ** MH = metal halide † HPS = high-pressure sodium



### DOE also reviewed the prices on municipal web sites. These are procurement contracts that the different municipalities negotiate with distributors. As illustrated in Table 5.1.2, these values can vary widely from state to state for the same lamp. 7,8,9,10,11,12

5-3

### Table 5.1.2. Municipal Lamp Prices Lamp Type Lamp Power W Arkansas Price

$ West Virginia Price

$ North Dakota Price

$ Oklahoma Price

$ Ohio Price

$ New Jersey Price

$ MV 250 44.15 18.89 --- --- --- --- MV 400 45.69 19.54 --- --- --- --- MH 175 31.68 15.31 --- --- --- --- MH 250 35.87 15.20 --- --- --- --- MH 360 39.11 13.95 --- --- --- --- MH 400 88.52 32.56 --- --- --- --- HPS 100 --- 10.17 --- 8.87 11.65 --- HPS 150 --- --- 9.30 8.87 11.65 --- HPS 250 --- 10.47 --- 9.89 --- 7.49 PMH 150 45.93 19.19 --- --- --- --- PMH 175 39.95 40.20 --- --- --- --- PMH 250 66.52 66.95 --- --- --- --- PMH 320 68.79 69.24 --- --- --- ---



### Finally, DOE surveyed lamp prices on publicly accessible websites for W.W. Grainger, Inc. (Grainger) and GoodMart.com (Goodmart) 13,14 

### in March 2010. These online retailer price catalogs were selected because they offer a wide range of products ( i.e. , lamps, ballasts, and luminaires) for multiple types of HID lamps and wattages. Figure 5.1.2 presents the lamp type, wattage, and price from the data surveyed. This me thodology of reviewing Grainger for prices is consistent with the pricing me thodology used in previous rulemakings, including the Small Electric Motor Determination. 15

0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400

0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200InitialPrice(U.S.$)

Lamp Rated Power (W) 

### Comparison of Lamp Power (W) and Price ($)

MH

MV

HPS

PMH



### Figure 5.1.2. Lamp Wattage/Price Comparison

5-4

### DOE developed trendlines to interpolate the pr ice for different wattage s. The interpolated lines resulted in the following functions per lamp type where x is the lamp wattage and y is the lamp price:

0.4271 

###  Mercury Vapor: y = 4.1461 x R 2 

### = 0.2472 a

0.1915 

###  Probe-Start Metal Halide: y = 15.366 x R 2 

### = 0.1059
0.456 

###  Pulse-Start Metal Halide: y = 5.4365 x R 2 

### = 0.5063
0.525 

###  High-Pressure Sodium: y = 3.6562 x R 2 

### = 0.4029

Based on its analysis, DOE chose to base HID lamp prices for the LCC-PBP analysis on the wattage-price functions developed fr om Grainger and Goodmart price data. 13,14 

### This online retailer price data is publicly ava ilable (requiring no special login to access the data) and offers product information that could be applied to the full range of HID lighting system technologies and components. Table 5.1.3 summarizes the a ssumed prices for the evaluated lamps.

Table 5.1.3. Lamp Price Derived from Online Distributor Websites Baseline Option Substitute Option Lamp Type Lamp Power W Lamp Price $ Lamp Type Lamp Power W Lamp Price $ MV 175 $37.64 HPS 100 $41.02 MV 250 $43.83 HPS 150 $50.75 MV 400 $53.58 HPS 250 $66.37
MH 175 $41.31 PMH 150 $53.41
MH 250 $44.24 PMH 175 $57.30
MH 360 $47.43 PMH 250 $67.42
MH 400 $48.40 PMH 320 $75.45



### 5.1.3 Ballast Prices

As with HID lamps, DOE evaluated pricing for HID ballasts from typical, publicly available sources. First, DOE reviewed RSMeans. 6 

### However, RSMeans only had prices for fluorescent ballasts, not HID ballasts.

DOE also surveyed ballast prices on public ly accessible websites for Grainger and Goodmart in April 2010. 13,14 

### Figure 5.1.3 provides the lamp type, wattage, and price from the data surveyed.

a R 2 denotes the “ correlation coefficient r ” and is used to convey how good a fit data is to a line, curve, or equation. It is calculated by taking the square root of 1 – the square of the standard deviation of y for the same value of x divided by the square of the standard deviation of y

.

5-5

### Figure 5.1.3. Ballast Prices 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000

0 500 1000 1500 2000BallastPrice(U.S.$)

Lamp Rated Power (W) 

### Comparison of Ballast Lamp Rated Power (W) and Price ($)

MH

HPS

PMH



### Based on the data graphed, DOE used trendlin es to interpolate the ballast price for different lamp wattages. The interpolated lines resulted in the following functions per lamp type where x is the lamp wattage and y is the ballast price:

 Probe-Start Metal Halide: y = 0.1582 x +147.77 R 2 

### = 0.3377

 Pulse-Start Metal Halide: y =0.1775 x +131.89 R 2 

### = 0.7368

 High-Pressure Sodium: y =0.4347 x +151.61 R 2 

### =0.5627

As with HID lamps, DOE chose to base HID ballast prices on the wattage-price functions developed from Grainger and Goodmart price data. 13,14 

### Although some MV ballasts exist, the long-term supply is restricted because these ba llasts have not been ma nufactured or imported since December 31, 2007. DOE assumes that MV ba llast shipments will decline to zero by the effective date of a possible energy conservation standard and therefore di d not develop research prices for the remaining stock of MV ballasts on shelves. Ta ble 5.1.4 summarizes the assumed ballast prices for the evaluated lamps.

Table 5.1.4. Ballast Price Derived fr om Online Distributor Websites Baseline Option Substitute Option Lamp Type Lamp Wattage W Ballast Price $ Lamp Type Lamp Power W Ballast Price $ MV 175 --- HPS 100 195.08 MV 250 --- HPS 150 216.82 MV 400 --- HPS 250 260.29 MH 175 175.46 PMH 150 158.52 MH 250 187.32 PMH 175 162.95 MH 360 204.72 PMH 250 176.27 MH 400 211.05 PMH 320 188.69

5-6

### 5.1.4 Luminaire Prices

As with HID lamps and ballasts, DOE evaluated pricing for HID luminaires from typical, publicly available sources. First, DOE reviewed RSMeans. 6 

### Table 5.1.5 presents HID luminaire prices from the 2008 version.

Table 5.1.5. Prices from 2008 RSMeans for High-Intensity Discharge Luminaires
MH Luminaires HPS Luminaires Roadway / Area Floodlighting Roadway / Area Floodlighting Power W Price $ Power W Price $ Power W Price $ Power W Price $ 175 325 70 224 400 465 400 405 400 485 400 365 1,000 525 1,000 555 1,000 550 1,000 625



### DOE also surveyed luminaire prices on publicly accessible websites for W.W. Grainger, Inc. and GoodMart.com in March 2010. 13,14 

### Figure 5.1.4 provides the lamp type, wattage, and price from the data surveyed.

0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700

0 100 200 300 400 500LuminairePrice(U.S.$)

Luminaire Power (W) 

### Comparison of Interior Luminaire Power and Price

MH

HPS



### Figure 5.1.4. Lamp Wattage/Luminaire Price Comparison

Based on the data graphed, DOE used trendlin es to interpolate the price for different luminaire wattages. The interpolated lines resulted in the following functions per lamp type where x is the lamp wattage and y is the luminaire price:

 Metal Halide: y = 0.5176 x +180.75 R 2 

### = 0.0942

 High-Pressure Sodium: y =0.0944 x +204.18 R 2 

### =0.0271

5-7

### As with HID lamps, DOE chose to base HID luminaire prices on the wattage-price functions developed from Grai nger and Goodmart price data. 13,14 

### DOE added $100 to the cost ( e.g. , 180.75+100 = 280.75) for the exterior prices regardless of the source technology. DOE assumed that probe-start MH luminaires were 20 percent less expensive than pulse-start MH luminaires for both interior and exterior luminaires. Prices for comparable MV luminaires were generally not available; consequently, DOE assu med that the prices for MV luminaires were 67 percent (two-thirds) of the comparable pul se-start MH luminaires. Table 5.1.6 presents a summary of assumed HID luminaire prices used in the LCC-PBP analysis.

Table 5.1.6. Lamp Price Derived from Online Distributor Websites Baseline Option Substitute Option Lamp Type Lamp Wattage Interior Luminaire Price

$ Exterior Luminaire Price

$ Lamp Type Lamp Wattage Interior Luminaire Price

$ Exterior Luminaire Price

$ MV 175 --- 248.81 HPS 100 213.62 313.62 MV 250 --- 274.82 HPS 150 218.34 318.34 MV 400 --- 326.84 HPS 250 227.78 327.78 MH 175 217.09 297.09 PMH 150 258.42 358.42 MH 250 248.14 328.14 PMH 175 271.36 371.36 MH 360 293.69 373.69 PMH 250 310.18 410.18 MH 400 310.26 390.26 PMH 320 346.41 446.41



### 5.1.5 Lamp Lifetime

Lifetime for HID lamps is determined when 50 percent of a sample population has failed. Within the lighting industry, this metric is known as B 50


### . After issuing the 2003 draft report, 16 

### DOE received comments about the rated lamp lifetimes. Routine group relamping time for MV and HPS lamps is typically four years and MH lamps is two years. 17 

### (Caltrans, No. 8 at p. 2; Allegheny, No. 12 at p.1) Allegheny further stated that the lamp life is generally the rated lamp life by the manufacturer.

DOE surveyed the available lamp catalogs and found that, for any given wattage, the rated life of the lamp can vary. Table 5.1.7 th rough Table 5.1.13 list the minimum, median, and maximum rated lifetimes for the different lamps. DOE is using the median rated life as the basis for relamping schedules in the LCC-PBP modeling.

Table 5.1.7. Lamp Life Data (175-Watt Mercury Vapor Baseline) Lamp Type Lamp Power W Minimum Rated Life hr Median Rated Life hr Maximum Rated Life hr Baseline MV 175 16,000 24,000 24,000 Substitute 1 PMH 150 2,800 15,000 20,000 Substitute 2 HPS 100 9,000 24,000 40,000

5-8

### Table 5.1.8. Lamp Life Data (250-Watt Mercury Vapor Baseline) Lamp Type Lamp Power W Minimum Rated Life hr Median Rated Life hr Maximum Rated Life hr Baseline MV 250 12,000 24,000 24,000 Design Option 1 PMH 150 2,800 15,000 20,000 Design Option 2 HPS 150 9,000 24,000 40,000



### Table 5.1.9. Lamp Life Data (400-Watt Mercury Vapor Baseline) Lamp Type Lamp Power W Minimum Rated Life hr Median Rated Life hr Maximum Rated Life hr Baseline MV 400 12,000 24,000 24,000 Design Option 1 PMH 250 10,000 15,000 20,000 Design Option 2 HPS 150 9,000 24,000 40,000



### Table 5.1.10. Lamp Life Data (175-Watt Metal Halide Baseline) Lamp Type Lamp Power W Minimum Rated Life hr Median Rated Life hr Maximum Rated Life hr Baseline MH 175 10,000 10,000 10,000 Design Option 1 PMH 150 2,800 12,000 20,000 Design Option 2 HPS 100 10,000 24,000 40,000



### Table 5.1.11. Lamp Life Data (250-Watt Metal Halide Baseline) Lamp Type Lamp Power W Minimum Rated Life hr Median Rated Life hr Maximum Rated Life hr Baseline MH 250 10,000 10,000 15,000 Design Option 1 PMH 175 10,000 15,000 15,000 Design Option 2 HPS 150 9,000 24,000 40,000



### Table 5.1.12. Lamp Life Data (360-Watt Metal Halide Baseline) Lamp Type Lamp Power W Minimum Rated Life hr Median Rated Life hr Maximum Rated Life hr Baseline MH 360 20,000 20,000 30,000 Design Option 1 PMH 320 10,000 20,000 20,000 Design Option 2 HPS 250 9,000 24,000 40,000



### Table 5.1.13. Lamp Life Data (400-Watt Metal Halide Baseline) Lamp Type Lamp Power W Minimum Rated Life hr Median Rated Life hr Maximum Rated Life hr Baseline MH 400 8,000 20,000 20,000 Design Option 1 PMH 320 10,000 20,000 20,000 Design Option 2 HPS 250 9,000 24,000 40,000

5-9

### 5.1.6 Ballast Lifetime

In the technical support document for the 2003 draft report, DOE assumed a ballast lifetime of 50,000 hours. 18 

### During the public meeting for the metal halide lamp luminaire rulemaking framework, a manufacturer stated th at NEMA, when in California for a meeting related to a similar California rule, agreed that the typical lifetimes for magnetic HID ballasts was 60,000 hours and electronic HID ballasts was between 30,000 and 50,000 hours. 19 

### DOE reviewed California’s Database for Energy Effi cient Resources website, which lists the life of electronic ballasts at 70,000 hours a nd magnetic ballasts at 45,000 hours. 20



### The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) developed a lighting maintenance checklist as part of the EPA’s Green Lights program. Within the document, the EPA acknowledges that there is no reliable long-term test data and recognizes the manuf acturer’s claims about lifetime. Additionally, the EPA states that “ballast failure rate can be expected to be small in the first 70% of average life and increase beyond that point.” 21



### Based on this research, DOE assumed that the average life of magnetic ballast was 50,000 hours. Electronic ballasts represent a very small segment of the HID market and thus were not considered in the LCC-PBP analysis.

5.1.7 Contractor Mark-Up

DOE received comments after the 2003 draft report. The American Council for an Energy Efficient Economy commented that DOE should use 13% for contractor markup. (ACEEE, No. 11 at p 2) This value is consistent with the contractor markup used in previous rulemakings, including the Fluorescent Ballast s Energy Conservation Standards Final Rule 22 

### as well as the current revision to that rule. 23



### 5.1.8 Sales Tax

DOE assumed a national average sales tax of 7 percent for the LCC-PBP analysis. This value is consistent with that presented in th e Fluorescent Ballasts Energy Conservation Standards preliminary TSD. 24,23



### 5.1.9 Maintenance Costs

The cost associated with maintenance is a real cost in the life-cycle analysis of a product. Typical applications of HID lamps often require lifts to access the luminaire for lamp replacement. The actual cost of maintenance will vary depending geographic region, mounting height, and whether the luminaire is located insi de or outside. The overall wattage of the lamp should not factor in the individual relamping costs; however, the higher mounting heights typically require higher-wattage lamps with higher light output.

To determine the maintenance costs, DOE surveyed a number of sources.

During the January public meeting for the framework document for the Metal Halide Lamp Luminaire energy conservation standard, a manufacturer commented:

5-10

### As far as maintenance costs, we’d urge you to consider that, particularly in exterior environments; maintenance cost s can be quite significant. It's difficult to get a bucket truck to a site to work on pole-mounted lumin aires for less than a thousand dollars just to get it there and the average that our experience shows needs to be attributed somewhere between $150 and $300 per luminaire per servicin g. So that is higher than you would traditionally think it would be for interior and just wanted to make that comment. 19



### As part of DOE’s solid-state lighting commercialization efforts, DOE conducts demonstrations of light-emitting diode (LED) technology in real-world applications through its GATEWAY program. A number of the GATEWAY de monstrations have focused on exterior lighting, where the maintenance costs often help with the payback of the typically more expensive LED luminaires. The maintenance costs are used in the GATEWAY demonstration
program:

 A demonstration with the Federal Aviation Administration in Atlantic City, New Jersey assumed that annual mainte nance costs for relamping was $39.24 for labor. These luminaires are mounted roughly 15 ft abov e finished grade (AFG) and thus do not require a truck. This annual relamping labor rate was estimated from a much larger general facilities maintenance contract. 25 

### Assuming that the lamp will be replaced every 5.5 years, the typical cost of relamping is $215.82.

 A demonstration in Portland, Oregon, replacing HPS luminaires with LED luminaires in a parking structure assumed an annual rela mping cost of $10.5 including the lamp. The luminaires here were mounted just over 7 ft AFG and thus did not require a lift. 26 

### Assuming that the lamp will be replaced every 2.8 years, the typical cost of relamping is $28.76.

 A demonstration with Minneso ta Department of Transportation (Mn/DOT) where LED luminaires were installed on a bridge on an in terstate found the typical cost for relamping was $137.25 per luminaire. This was similar to average rate across all of Mn/DOT’s territory of $130 to $150 per luminaire. 27



###  A demonstration with Pacific Gas & Electric that replaced HPS streetlights with LEDs assumed an annual ma intenance cost of $ 24.44. 28 

### Assuming that the lamp will be replaced every 5.5 years, the typical cost of relamping is $134.42.

 A demonstration with Pacific Gas & Electric that replaced probe-start metal halide luminaires in a parking lot in the Sacramento, California, area had maintenance costs between $200 and $215 per luminai re for lamp servicing. 29



###  A demonstration in Portland, Oregon, that replaced HPS streetlights with LED streetlights had annual ma intenance costs of $32.40 (100 W), $32.52 (150 W), $32.76 (250 W), and $32.88 (400 W). 30 

### Assuming that the lamp will be replaced every 5.5 years, the typical cost of relamping is between: $178.20 and $180.84.

A case study by Kwantlen Polytechnic Un iversity found that, when replacing 16 incandescent luminaires with compact fluorescen t lamps, a total of $3,500 in maintenance was deferred. This translates to a cost of $218.75 per luminaire for maintenance. 31



### Based on this research, DOE assumed the av erage ($225) of the range ($150 to $300) provided during the MH lamp luminaire public meeting for the maintenance cost per relamping for exterior applications in the LCC-PBP analysis.

5-11

### DOE could not find reliable cost data for in terior relamping. Therefore, DOE assumed that the exterior maintenance is three times as expensive as interior relamping. This is consistent with the comment received during the metal halide lamp luminaire public meeting that exterior relamping is more expensive than interior relamping. 19 

### Therefore, DOE used $75 for interior relamping for the LCC-PBP analysis.

5.1.10 Electricity Price

DOE determined the relevant price of electricity based on the types of entities that purchase and own the HID lamps being considered. DOE based comme rcial and industrial electricity prices on the average of the 2017 a nd 2030 forecasts from the Energy Information Administration’s Annual Energy Outlook 2010

. 32 

### This approach is consis tent with that presented in the Fluorescent Ballasts Energy Conservation Standards preliminary TSD. 24,23



### 5.1.11 Discount Rate

The discount rate is the rate at which future expenditures are discounted to estimate their present value. For this determination, DOE us ed the industrial and co mmercial discount rates calculated in the Fluorescent Ballasts Energy Conservation Standards preliminary TSD, made available on March 24, 2010. 23 

### For commercial and industrial consumers, DOE estimated the cost of capital for commercial and industrial companies by ex amining both debt and equity capital, and developed an appropria tely weighted average of the cost to the company of equity and debt financing. The resulting average disc ounted industrial and co mmercial discount rates used in the LCC-PBP analysis are 7.6 percent and 7.0 percent, respectively.

5.2 RESULTS FOR MEDIUM-WATTAGE MERCURY VAPOR DESIGN OPTIONS

DOE did not present LCC-PBP analysis results for MV lamps in the notice of determination for HID lamps. MV ballasts can no longer be imported or manufactured; consequently, DOE assumed that consumers would have to sw itch to another HID technology when existing MV ballasts failed, regardless of fi nancial benefit or penalty. DOE also assumed that MV luminaires were not a viable option in a new construction or luminaire scenario and does not present related LCC-PBP results here. All LCC-PBP analysis results for MV lamps are presented for reference only.

5.2.1 Event 1 – Lamp-Only Replacement

Table 5.2.1 through Table 5.2.3 present the results for medium wattage (150 to 500 W) MV lamps and higher-efficiency substitute HID lamps in a lamp-only replacement scenario. DOE considered MV lamps in exterior applications only. In this scenario, a failed baseline lamp is replaced either with an identical baseline la mp or with a substitute lamp-and-ballast system. These analyses were based on representative, incremental lamp and luminaire prices as well as maintenance costs. Given the assumed disappe arance of MV products from the marketplace, DOE did not consider the negative LCC sa vings for MV substitutes in its proposed determination.

5-12

### Table 5.2.1. Life-Cycle Cost-Payback Period Analysis for 175-Watt Mercury Vapor Baseline
Commercial/Exterior Baseline 175 W MV $ Substitute 1 150 W PMH* $ Substitute 2 100 W HPS $ Ballast Price

-- 190.22 234.10 Lamp Price 45.17 64.09 49.23 Total First Cost 45.17 254.31 283.33 Incremental First Cost

-- 209.14 238.16 Annual Operating Cost 294.90 288.18 263.26 Annual Operating Cost Differential

-- 6.72 31.64 Life-Cycle Cost (7% Discount Rate) 2,411.70 2,960.60 2,562.72 LCC Savings

-- -548.89 -151.01

Payback Period (years)

-- 66.77 12.02 * PMH = pulse-start metal halide



### Table 5.2.2. Life-Cycle Cost-Payback Period Analysis for 250-Watt Mercury Vapor Baseline
Commercial/Exterior Baseline 250 W MV $ Substitute 1 150 W PMH $ Substitute 2 150 W HPS $ Ballast Price

-- 190.22 260.18 Lamp Price 52.60 64.09 60.91 Total First Cost 52.60 254.31 321.09 Incremental First Cost

-- 201.71 268.49 Annual Operating Cost 326.94 288.18 288.18 Annual Operating Cost Differential

-- 38.76 38.76 Life-Cycle Cost (7% Discount Rate) 2,664.36 2,960.60 2,777.42 LCC Savings

-- -296.24 -113.07

Payback Period (years)

-- 11.39 10.07



### Table 5.2.3. Life-Cycle Cost-Payback Period Analysis for 400-Watt Mercury Vapor Baseline
Commercial/Exterior Baseline 400 W MV $ Substitute 1 250 W PMH $ Substitute 2 150 W HPS $ Ballast Price

-- 312.34 260.18 Lamp Price 64.29 80.90 60.91 Total First Cost 64.29 393.24 321.09 Incremental First Cost

-- 328.95 256.80 Annual Operating Cost 394.58 327.73 288.18 Annual Operating Cost Differential

-- 66.85 106.40 Life-Cycle Cost (7% Discount Rate) 3,189.24 3,231.42 2,777.42 LCC Savings

-- -42.17 411.82

Payback Period (years)

-- 7.61 3.56

5-13

### 5.2.2 Event 1b – Lamp/Lum inaire Replacement

Table 5.2.4 through Table 5.2.6 present the results for medium wattage (150 to 500 W) MV lamps and higher-efficiency substitute HID lamps in a scenario where the substitute lamp/ballast cannot fit (electrically or mechanically) in the existing luminaire a new luminaire is needed. DOE considered MV lamps in exterior applications only. In this scenario, a failed baseline lamp is replaced either with an identical baseline lamp or with a substitute luminaire and lamp. These analyses were based on representativ e, incremental lamp and luminaire prices as well as maintenance costs. Given the assu med disappearance of MV products from the marketplace, DOE did not consider the negative LCC savings for MV substitutes in its proposed determination.

Table 5.2.4. Life-Cycle Cost-Payback Period Analysis for 175-Watt Mercury Vapor Baseline
Commercial/Exterior Baseline 175 W MV $ Substitute 1 150 W PMH $ Substitute 2 100 W HPS $ Luminaire Price (incl. ballast)

-- 190.22 234.10 Lamp Price 45.17 64.09 49.23 Total First Cost 45.17 254.31 283.33 Incremental First Cost

-- 209.14 238.16 Annual Operating Cost 294.90 288.18 263.26 Annual Operating Cost Differential

-- 6.72 31.64 Life-Cycle Cost (7% Discount Rate) 2,411.70 2,960.60 2,562.72 LCC Savings

-- -548.89 -151.01

Payback Period (years)

-- 66.77 12.02



### Table 5.2.5. Life-Cycle Cost-Payback Period Analysis for 250-Watt Mercury Vapor Baseline
Commercial/Exterior Baseline 250 W MV $ Substitute 1 150 W PMH $ Substitute 2 150 W HPS $ Luminaire Price (incl. ballast)

-- 190.22 260.18 Lamp Price 52.60 64.09 60.91 Total First Cost 52.60 254.31 321.09 Incremental First Cost

-- 201.71 268.49 Annual Operating Cost 326.94 288.18 288.18 Annual Operating Cost Differential

-- 38.76 38.76 Life-Cycle Cost (7% Discount Rate) 2,664.36 2,960.60 2,777.42 LCC Savings

-- -296.24 -113.07

Payback Period (years)

-- 11.39 10.07

5-14

### Table 5.2.6. Life-Cycle Cost-Payback Period Analysis for 400-Watt Mercury Vapor Baseline
Commercial/Exterior Baseline 400 W MV $ Substitute 1 250 W PMH $ Substitute 2 150 W HPS $ Luminaire Price (incl. ballast)

-- 312.34 260.18 Lamp Price 64.29 80.90 60.91 Total First Cost 64.29 393.24 321.09 Incremental First Cost

-- 328.95 256.80 Annual Operating Cost 394.58 327.73 288.18 Annual Operating Cost Differential

-- 66.85 106.40 Life-Cycle Cost (7% Discount Rate) 3,189.24 3,231.42 2,777.42 LCC Savings

-- -42.17 411.82

Payback Period (years)

-- 7.61 3.56



### 5.3 RESULTS FOR MEDIUM-WATTAGE PROBE-START METAL HALIDE DESIGN OPTIONS

5.3.1 Event 1 – Lamp-Only Replacement

Table 5.3.1 through Table 5.3.4 present the results for medium wattage (150 to 500 W) probe-start MH lamps and higher-efficiency substitute HID lamps in a lamp-only replacement scenario. DOE considered MH lamps in both interior and exterior applications. In this scenario, a failed baseline lamp is replaced e ither with an identical baseline lamp or with a substitute lamp

and-ballast system. These analyses were based on representative, incremental lamp and luminaire prices as well as maintenance costs. A full rulemaking would yield more detailed results than the representative analyses conducted. Generally, the LCC of a high-efficiency lamp and ballast replacement is higher than the LCC of an inefficient lamp-only replacement.

Table 5.3.1. Life-Cycle Cost-Payback Period An alysis for 175-Watt Metal Halide Baseline
Industrial/Interior Commercial/Exterior Baseline 175 W MH $ Substitute 1 150 W PMH $ Baseline 175 W MH $ Substitute 2 100 W HPS $ Ballast Price

-- 190.22

-- 234.10 Lamp Price 49.58 64.09 49.58 49.23 Total First Cost 49.58 254.31 49.58 283.33 Incremental First Cost

-- 204.73

-- 233.75 Annual Operating Cost 149.23 141.02 297.28 263.26 Annual Operating Cost Differential

-- 8.21

-- 34.02 Life-Cycle Cost (7% Discount Rate) 1,234.57 1,555.89 2,537.89 2,562.72 LCC Savings

-- -321.31

-- -24.82

Payback Period (years)

-- 39.55

-- 11.05

5-15

### Table 5.3.2. Life-Cycle Cost-Payback Period Analysis for 250-Watt Metal Halide Baseline
Industrial/Interior Commercial/Exterior Baseline 250 W MH $ Substitute 1 175 W PMH $ Baseline 250 W MH $ Substitute 2 150 W HPS $ Ballast Price

-- 195.54

-- 260.18 Lamp Price 53.08 68.76 53.08 60.91 Total First Cost 53.08 264.30 53.08 321.09 Incremental First Cost

-- 211.22

-- 268.01 Annual Operating Cost 178.85 149.59 330.11 288.18 Annual Operating Cost Differential

-- 29.26

-- 41.93 Life-Cycle Cost (7% Discount Rate) 853.30 994.23 1,983.51 2,126.51 LCC Savings

-- -106.72

-- 17.63

Payback Period (years)

-- 11.66

-- 9.30



### Table 5.3.3. Life-Cycle Cost-Payback Period Analysis for 360-Watt Metal Halide Baseline
Industrial/Interior Commercial/Exterior Baseline 360 W MH $ Substitute 1 320 W PMH $ Baseline 360 W MH $ Substitute 2 250 W HPS $ Ballast Price

-- 226.43

-- 211.52 Lamp Price 56.92 90.54 56.92 79.64 Total First Cost 56.92 316.97 56.92 291.16 Incremental First Cost

-- 260.05

-- 234.24 Annual Operating Cost 217.75 205.97 373.22 331.69 Annual Operating Cost Differential

-- 11.78

-- 41.53 Life-Cycle Cost (7% Discount Rate) 788.24 1,083.54 1,919.94 2,146.17 LCC Savings

-- -295.30 -- -226.23

Payback Period (years)

-- 22.08

-- 5.64



### Table 5.3.4. Life-Cycle Cost-Payback Period Analysis for 400-Watt Metal Halide Baseline
Industrial/Interior Commercial/Exterior Baseline 400 W MH $ Substitute 1 320 W PMH $ Baseline 400 W MH $ Substitute 2 250 W HPS $ Ballast Price

-- 226.43

-- 211.52 Lamp Price 58.08 90.54 58.08 79.64 Total First Cost 58.08 316.97 58.08 291.16 Incremental First Cost

-- 258.89

-- 233.08 Annual Operating Cost 237.74 205.97 395.37 331.69 Annual Operating Cost Differential

-- 31.77

-- 63.68 Life-Cycle Cost (7% Discount Rate) 810.40 1,083.54 1,937.06 2,146.17 LCC Savings

-- -273.14 -- -209.11

Payback Period (years)

-- 8.15

-- 3.66

5-16

### 5.3.2 Event 1b – Lamp/Lum inaire Replacement

Table 5.3.5 through Table 5.3.8 present the results for medium wattage (150 to 500 W) probe-start MH lamps and higher-efficiency substitute HID lamps in a scenario where the substitute lamp/ballast ca nnot fit (electrically or mechanically ) in the existing luminaire a new luminaire is needed. DOE considered MH lamps in both interior and exterior applications. In this scenario, a failed baseline lamp is replaced either with an identical baseline lamp or with a substitute luminaire and lamp. These analyses were based on representative, incremental lamp and luminaire prices as well as maintenance costs. A full rulemaking would yield more detailed results than the representative analyses conducte d. Generally, the LCC of a high-efficiency luminaire and lamp replacement is higher than the LCC of an inefficient lamp-only replacement.

Table 5.3.5. Life-Cycle Cost-Payback Period An alysis for 175-Watt Metal Halide Baseline
Industrial/Interior Commercial/Exterior Baseline 175 W MH $ Substitute 1 150 W PMH $ Baseline 175 W MH $ Substitute 2 100 W HPS $ Luminaire Price (incl. ballast)

-- 190.22

-- 234.10 Lamp Price 49.58 64.09 49.58 49.23 Total First Cost 49.58 254.31 49.58 283.33 Incremental First Cost

-- 204.73

-- 233.75 Annual Operating Cost 149.23 141.02 297.28 263.26 Annual Operating Cost Differential

-- 8.21

-- 34.02 Life-Cycle Cost (7% Discount Rate) 1,234.57 1,555.89 2,537.89 2,562.72 LCC Savings

-- -321.31

-- -24.82

Payback Period (years)

-- 39.55

-- 11.05



### Table 5.3.6. Life-Cycle Cost-Payback Period Analysis for 250-Watt Metal Halide Baseline
Industrial/Interior Commercial/Exterior Baseline 250 W MH $ Substitute 1 175 W PMH $ Baseline 250 W MH $ Substitute 2 150 W HPS $ Luminaire Price (incl. ballast)

-- 195.54

-- 260.18 Lamp Price 53.08 68.76 53.08 60.91 Total First Cost 53.08 264.30 53.08 321.09 Incremental First Cost

-- 211.22

-- 268.01 Annual Operating Cost 178.85 149.59 330.11 288.18 Annual Operating Cost Differential

-- 29.26

-- 41.93 Life-Cycle Cost (7% Discount Rate) 853.30 994.23 1,983.51 2,126.51 LCC Savings

-- -106.72

-- 17.63

Payback Period (years)

-- 11.66

-- 9.30

5-17

### Table 5.3.7. Life-Cycle Cost-Payback Period Analysis for 360-Watt Metal Halide Baseline
Industrial/Interior Commercial/Exterior Baseline 360 W MH $ Substitute 1 320 W PMH $ Baseline 360 W MH $ Substitute 2 250 W HPS $ Luminaire Price (incl. ballast)

-- 226.43

-- 211.52 Lamp Price 56.92 90.54 56.92 79.64 Total First Cost 56.92 316.97 56.92 291.16 Incremental First Cost

-- 260.05

-- 234.24 Annual Operating Cost 217.75 205.97 373.22 331.69 Annual Operating Cost Differential

-- 11.78

-- 41.53 Life-Cycle Cost (7% Discount Rate) 788.24 1,083.54 1,919.94 2,146.17 LCC Savings

-- -295.30 -- -226.23

Payback Period (years)

-- 22.08

-- 5.64



### Table 5.3.8. Life-Cycle Cost-Payback Period Analysis for 400-Watt Metal Halide Baseline
Industrial/Interior Commercial/Exterior Baseline 400 W MH $ Substitute 1 320 W PMH $ Baseline 400 W MH $ Substitute 2 250 W HPS $ Luminaire Price (incl. ballast)

-- 226.43

-- 211.52 Lamp Price 58.08 90.54 58.08 79.64 Total First Cost 58.08 316.97 58.08 291.16 Incremental First Cost

-- 258.89

-- 233.08 Annual Operating Cost 237.74 205.97 395.37 331.69 Annual Operating Cost Differential

-- 31.77

-- 63.68 Life-Cycle Cost (7% Discount Rate) 810.40 1,083.54 1,937.06 2,146.17 LCC Savings

-- -273.14 -- -209.11

Payback Period (years)

-- 8.15

-- 3.66



### 5.3.3 Event 2 – New Construction / Luminaire Replacement

Table 5.3.9 through Table 5.3.12 below present th e results for medium wattage (150 to 500 W) probe-start MH lamps and higher-efficien cy substitute HID lamps in a new construction or luminaire replacement scenario. DOE consider ed MH lamps in both in terior and exterior applications. In this scenario, a consumer selects either a baseline luminaire or a substitute luminaire and lamp. In the exterior lighting cases, the HPS substitutes have a lower LCC. These analyses were based on representative and incremental lamp and luminaire prices as well as maintenance costs. A full rulemaking would yield more detailed results than the representative analyses conducted.

5-18

### Table 5.3.9. Life-Cycle Cost-Payback Period An alysis for 175-Watt Metal Halide Baseline
Industrial/Interior Commercial/Exterior Baseline 175 W MH $ Substitute 1 150 W PMH $ Baseline 175 W MH $ Substitute 2 100 W HPS $ Luminaire Price (incl. ballast) 260.51 310.10 356.51 376.34 Lamp Price 49.58 64.09 49.58 49.23 Total First Cost 310.09 374.19 406.09 425.57 Incremental First Cost

-- 64.10

-- 19.73 Annual Operating Cost 149.23 141.02 297.28 263.26 Annual Operating Cost Differential

-- 8.21

-- 34.02 Life-Cycle Cost (7% Discount Rate) 1,069.34 1,176.22 2,304.03 2,201.51 LCC Savings

-- -106.89

-- 102.52

Payback Period (years)

-- 7.81

-- 0.58



### Table 5.3.10. Life-Cycle Cost-Payback Period Analysis for 250-Watt Metal Halide Baseline
Industrial/Interior Commercial/Exterior Baseline 250 W MH $ Substitute 1 175 W PMH $ Baseline 250 W MH $ Substitute 2 150 W HPS $ Luminaire Price (incl. ballast) 297.77 325.63 393.77 382.01 Lamp Price 53.08 68.76 53.08 60.91 Total First Cost 350.85 394.39 446.85 442.92 Incremental First Cost

-- 43.54

-- -3.93 Annual Operating Cost 178.85 149.59 330.11 288.18 Annual Operating Cost Differential

-- 29.26

-- 41.93 Life-Cycle Cost (7% Discount Rate) 1,151.07 1,124.32 2,377.28 2,248.34 LCC Savings

-- 26.75

-- 128.94

Payback Period (years)

-- 1.49

-- -0.09



### Table 5.3.11. Life-Cycle Cost-Payback Period Analysis for 360-Watt Metal Halide Baseline
Industrial/Interior Commercial/Exterior Baseline 360 W MH $ Substitute 1 320 W PMH $ Baseline 360 W MH $ Substitute 2 250 W HPS $ Luminaire Price (incl. ballast) 352.43 415.69 448.43 393.34 Lamp Price 56.92 90.54 56.92 79.64 Total First Cost 409.35 506.23 505.35 472.98 Incremental First Cost

-- 96.88

-- -32.37 Annual Operating Cost 217.75 205.97 373.22 331.69 Annual Operating Cost Differential

-- 11.78

-- 41.53 Life-Cycle Cost (7% Discount Rate) 1,140.67 1,272.81 2,368.37 2,328.00 LCC Savings

-- -132.14

-- 40.37

Payback Period (years)

-- 8.22

-- -0.78

5-19

### Table 5.3.12. Life-Cycle Cost-Payback Period Analysis for 400-Watt Metal Halide Baseline
Industrial/Interior Commercial/Exterior Baseline 400 W MH $ Substitute 1 320 W PMH $ Baseline 400 W MH $ Substitute 2 250 W HPS $ Luminaire Price (incl. ballast) 372.31 415.69 468.31 393.34 Lamp Price 58.08 90.54 58.08 79.64 Total First Cost 430.39 506.23 526.39 472.98 Incremental First Cost

-- 75.84

-- -53.41 Annual Operating Cost 237.74 205.97 395.37 331.69 Annual Operating Cost Differential

-- 31.77

-- 63.68 Life-Cycle Cost (7% Discount Rate) 1,182.71 1,272.81 2,405.37 2,328.00 LCC Savings

-- -90.10

-- 77.37

Payback Period (years)

-- 2.39

-- -0.84

5-20

### 7 REFERENCES

1. Illuminating Engineering Society of North America. Selection of Photocontrols for Outdoor Lighting Applications . IESNA DG-13-98. December 1998. New York, NY.

2. E Source. High-Bay Lighting: HID versus HIF. TAS-RG-4. November 2007. Boulder, CO.

3. INFORM, Inc. Purchasing for Pollution Prevention High-Bay Lighting: Opportunities for Mercury Reduction and Energy Efficiency . December 2003. New York, NY.

4. E Source. New High-Intensity Fluorescent Lights Outshine Their HID Competitors. ER-00

- 1. January 2000. Boulder, CO.

5. U.S. Department of Energy–Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy. Technical Support Document: Energy Efficiency Progra m for Commercial and Industrial Equipment: High-Intensity Discharge Lamps Analys is of Potential Energy Savings.

< http://www1.eere.energy.gov/buildings/applia nce_standards/commerc ial/pdfs/hid_energy _savings_report.pdf >

6. RSMeans. Building Construction Cost Data . P.R. Waier, Editor. 66 th 

### ed. 2008. Construction Publishers and Consultants: Kingston, MA.

Arkansas Department of Finance and Administration. (Last accessed August 28, 2009.)

< http://www.dfa.arkansas.gov/offices/procu rement/contracts/Documents/sp070399Consoli datedPricing.pdf >

8. State of West Virginia Department of Ad ministration Purchasing Division. (Last accessed August 28, 2009.) < http://www.state.wv.us/admin/purchase/SWC/LIGHT07_01.pdf >

9. North Dakota State Government Office of Management and Budget State Procurement Online. (Last accessed August 28, 2009.)

< https://secure.apps.state.nd.us/csd/spo/serv ices/bidder/listCu rrentContracts.htm >

10. State of Oklahoma Lamp & Ballast Catalog (Contract #SW 900025) Tier 1 Pricing. (Last accessed August 28, 2009.)

< http://www.dcs.state.ok.us/sw_cont racts.nsf/6fe2a5d9256854f886256c63004e411e/94517 660f046390c862575ba004ef018/$FILE/Oklahoma% 20Lamp%20%20Ballast%20eCat.pdf

>

11. Ohio Department of Administrative Services. (Last Accessed August 28, 2009.)

< http://procure.ohio.gov/proc/viewCont ractsAwards.asp?contractID=11568 >

12. State of New Jersey Department of Treasur y Division of Purchase and Property Index #:T

0192, Solicitation #:39192. (Last accessed August 28, 2009.)

< http://www.state.nj.us/treasury/pur chase/noa/contracts/t0192.shtml >

13. W.W. Grainger, Inc. (Last accessed April 16, 2010.) < www.grainger.com >

5-21

### 14. GoodMart. (Last accessed April 16, 2010.) < http://www.goodmart.com / >

15. U.S. Department of Energy–Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy. Energy Conservation Program for Consumer Products: Determination Concerning the Potential for Energy Conservation Standards for Small Elect ric Motors; Department al Determination. Federal Register . July 10, 2006. vol. 71, no. 131: 38799, 38803.

16. U.S. Department of Energy–Office of Ener gy Efficiency and Renewable Energy. Draft Framework for Determination Analysis of Energy Conservation Standards for High Intensity Discharge Lamps.

< http://www1.eere.energy.gov/buildings/applia nce_standards/commerc ial/pdfs/hid_draft_r eport.pdf

17. U.S. Department of Energy–Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy. Comments related to Energy Conservation Program: Energy Conservation Standards for High-Intensity Discharge Lamp Deter mination. Docket EE-DET-03-001Regulatory Identification Number (RIN) 1904-AA86.Comments 8 and 12.

18. U.S. Department of Energy–Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy. Energy Conservation Program for Consumer Produc ts: Technical Support Document: HighIntensity Discharge. 2003. Washington, D.C.

< http://www1.eere.energy.gov/buildings/applia nce_standards/commerc ial/pdfs/hid_draft_r eport.pdf >

19. U.S. Department of Energy–Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy. Comments from the Public Meeting for Energy Conservation Program: Energy Conservation Standards for Metal Halide Lamp Fixtures: Public Meeting and Availability of the Framework Document. Transcript for Docket EERE-2009-BT-STD-0018 Regulatory Identification Number (RIN) 1904-AC00.

20. California Public Utilities Commission. Database for Energy Efficient Resources . (Last accessed March 23, 2010.) < http://www.deeresources.com >

21. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Lighting Maintenance . EPA 430-B-95-009. January 1995. Washington, D.C.

22. U.S. Department of Energy–Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy. Energy Conservation Program for Consumer Produc ts: Fluorescent Lamp Ballasts Energy Conservation Standa rds; Final rule. Federal Register . September 19, 2000. vol. 65, no. 182: 56740.

23. U.S. Department of Energy–Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy. Energy Conservation Standards for Fluorescent Lamp Ballasts: Public Meeting and Availability of the Preliminary Technical Support Document; Notice of public meeting and availability of preliminary technical support document. Fe deral Register. March 24, 2010. vol. 75, no. 56: 14319.

5-22

### 24. U.S. Department of Energy–Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy. Energy Conservation Program for Consumer Products : Preliminary Technical Support Document: Fluorescent Lamp Ballasts. 2010. (Last accessed June 30, 2010.)

< http://www1.eere.energy.gov/buildings/applianc e_standards/residen tial/fluorescent_lamp _ballasts_ecs_prelim_tsd.html >

25. U.S. Department of Energy–Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy. Final Report Prepared in Support of the U.S. DOE Solid State Lighting Technology Demonstration Gateway Program: Demonstration Assessment of Light Emitting Diode (LED) Walkway Lighting. March 2008. Washington, D.C.

< http://apps1.eere.energy.gov/buildings/publications/pdfs/ssl/gateway_faa.pdf >

26. U.S. Department of Energy–Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy. Demonstration Assessment of Light-Emitting Diode (LED), Area Lights for a Commercial Garage. Washington, DC.

< http://apps1.eere.energy.gov/buildings/publications/pdfs/ssl/gateway_ppmc.pdf >

27. U.S. Department of Energy–Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy. Demonstration Assessment of Light-Emitting Diode (LED) Roadway Lighting. PNNL

18687. Washington, D.C.

< http://apps1.eere.energy.gov/buildings/publications/pdfs/ssl/gateway_i-35w-bridge.pdf >

28. U.S. Department of Energy–Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy. LED Street Lighting Pacific Ga s and Electric Company App lication Assessm ent Report #0727. Washington, D.C.

< http://apps1.eere.energy.gov/buildings/publications/pdfs/ssl/gateway_sf

streetlighting.pdf >

29. U.S. Department of Energy–Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy. Application Assessment of Bi-Level LED Parking Lot Lighting Pacific Gas and Electric Company Application Assessment Report #0815. Washington, D.C.

< http://apps1.eere.energy.gov/buildings/publications/pdfs/ssl/gateway_raleys.pdf >

30. U.S. Department of Energy–Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy. Demonstration Assessment of Light-Emitting Diode (LED) Street Lighting. PNNL-18947. Washington, D.C.

< http://apps1.eere.energy.gov/buildings/publications/pdfs/ssl/gateway_lija-loop.pdf >

31. Kwantlen Polytechnic University. Sustainability Success Story. Surrey, British Columbia, Canada. < http://www.kwantlen.ca/__shared/assets/0501_Success_Story_

- _Incandescent_Exterior_F ixture_Conversion_-_Surey6592.pdf >

32. Energy Information Administration, Annual Energy Outlook 2010 , DOE/EIA-0383. 2010. U.S. Department of Energy, Washington, D.C.

5-23