### 202-234-4433 Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Page 1 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA + + + + + DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY + + + + + COMBINED PUBLIC MEETING ON: TEST PROCEDURE NOTICE OF PROPOSED RULEMAKING (NOPR) - GENERAL SERVICE FLUORESCENT LAMPS, GENERAL SERVICE INCANDESCENT LAMPS, AND INCANDESCENT REFLECTOR LAMPS + + + + + TUESDAY OCTOBER 4, 2011

+ + + + + The Meeting met in the Room 1E-245, 1000 Independence Avenue, SW, Washington, D.C., at 9:00 a.m., Doug Brookman, Meeting Facilitator, presiding.

PRESENT DOUG BROOKMAN, Meeting Facilitator, Public Solutions TINA KAARSBURG, PhD, Department of Energy SUSAN ANDERSON, Osram Sylvania TIMOTHY BALLO, Earthjustice ALEX BOESENBERG, National Electrical Manufacturers Association KEITH COOK, Philips Lighting KU'UIPO CURRY, ICF International (on behalf of Energy Star) MAHIMA "MIMI" GUPTA, Navigant Consulting PEKKA HAKKARAINEN, Lutron Electronics Company AISHA HUSAIN, Navigant Consulting MAUREEN KIENLE, Navigant Consulting BETSY KOHL, Department of Energy, General Counsel JOANNA MAUER, Appliance Standards Awareness

### 202-234-4433 Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Page 2 Project MIKE MCGARAGHAN, Energy Solutions (on behalf of California Investor Owned Utilities) STEVE ROSENSTOCK, Edison Electric Institute CHARLIE STEPHENS, Northwest Energy Efficiency Alliance

### 202-234-4433 Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Page 3 A G E N D A

WELCOME; INTRODUCTIONS; OVERVIEW; AND OPENING STATEMENTS.......................4 Tina Kaarsberg, Ph.D., DOE Doug Brookman, Public Solutions NOPR TEST PROCEDURE..........................15 Maureen Kienle, Navigant

BREAK.........................................64

INTERESTED PARTY STATEMENTS.................68 NEMA, EEI, other FRAMEWORK ENERGY CONSERVATION STANDARDS OVERVIEW; SCOPE OF COVERAGE, MARKET AND TECHNOLOGY; SCREENING ANALYSIS..............88 Aisha Husain, Navigant

LUNCH.......................................139

ENGINEERING ANALYSIS; PRODUCT PRICE DETERMINATION; ENERGY USE.................140 Aisha Husain, Navigant

LIFE-CYCLE COST AND PAYBACK PERIOD AND SHIPMENT ANALYSES; NATIONAL IMPACT ANALYSIS; NOPR ANALYSIS; NEXT STEPS......214

QUESTIONS/DISCUSSIONS; CLOSING REMARKS...267 Tina Kaarsberg, Ph.D., DOE

### 202-234-4433 Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Page 4 1 P-R-O-C-E-E-D-I-N-G-S 2 (9:05 a.m.) 3 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: Good morning 4 everyone and welcome. This is the combined 5 meeting on Energy Conservation Standards and 6 Test Procedures for fluorescent and th 7 incandescent lamps. Today is October 4 , 2011 8 here at the Department of Energy in the 9 Forrestal Building. 10 My name is Doug Brookman from Public Solutions 11 in Baltimore. 12 We're going to start of this 13 morning with welcoming remarks from Tina 14 Kaarsberg. 15 MS. KAARSBERG: Okay. Am I supposed 16 to use this? Well, Doug didn't use a 17 microphone but I'll be different. 18 Well, welcome everyone, and we 19 appreciate the great turnout on what we 20 understand was a difficult date, and we 21 apologize and we'll never do it again. I 22 mean, we'll try not to do it again.

### 202-234-4433 Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Page 5 1 (Laughter.)

2 MS. KAARSBERG: We have here two -- 3 I call it the general service thing; two 4 general service things, lamp things in two 5 different stages of development. And I 6 understand from some preliminary conversations 7 I've had that there's a lot of interest, 8 especially in the framework standard. And I 9 look forward to your comments, and look 10 forward to working with you. 11 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: Thank you. 12 It's our tradition to start with 13 introductions. Please say your name and 14 organizational affiliation. I'll start right

15 over here.

16 MR. BOESENBERG: I'm Alex 17 Boesenberg. I'm the Regulatory Affairs 18 Manager for the National Electrical 19 Manufacturers Association. 20 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: And you can 21 get in the habit of turning the mics on, 22 please. Pekka.

### 202-234-4433 Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Page 6 1 DR. HAKKARAINEN: I'm Pekka 2 Hakkarainen with Lutron Electronics, and 3 currently chair the Lighting Systems Division

4 at NEMA. 5 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: Thank you.

6 MS. ANDERSON: I'm Susan Anderson 7 with Osram Sylvania. 8 MR. COOKE: Keith Cooke with Philips 9 Lighting. 10 MR. BALLO: Tim Ballo with Earth 11 Justice. 12 MR. ROSENSTOCK: Steve Rosenstock, 13 Edison Electric Institute. 14 MS. CURRY: Ku'uipo Curry, ICF 15 International in support of Energy Star. 16 MR. STEPHENS: Charlie Stephens, 17 Northwest Energy Efficiency Alliance. 18 MR. McGARAGHAN: Mike McGaraghan 19 from Energy Solutions here on behalf of the 20 California Investor Owned Utilities, which 21 include Pacific Gas & Electric, Southern 22 California Edison, San Diego Gas & Electric

### 202-234-4433 Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Page 7 1 and SoCal Gas. 2 MS. MAUER: Joanna Mauer, Appliance 3 Standards Awareness Project. 4 MS. GUPTA: Mimi Gupta, Navigant 5 Consulting. 6 MS. KIENLE: Maureen Kienle, 7 Navigant Consulting. 8 MS. HUSAIN: Aisha Husain, Navigant 9 Consulting. 10 MS. KOHL: Betsy Kohl, DOE General

11 Counsel. 12 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: Did we miss 13 anybody? Brenda, hello.

14 MS. EDWARDS: Brenda Edwards. 15 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: Okay. I 16 think all of you received a packet of 17 information as you came into the room. I'm 18 going to do a very brief general review. 19 You can see, as Tina described, 20 we're going to start off this morning with 21 presentation materials on the Notice of 22 Proposed Rulemaking Test Procedure. We'll

### 202-234-4433 Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Page 8 1 take a break midmorning around about 10:15 or 2 so. Following that more information and 3 opportunity for you to comment on the NOPR

4 Test Procedure.

5 Around about 11:00 or so we'll6 shift gears and move into the standards7 related material. There's an opportunity, as 8 soon as I'm finished with this agenda review, 9 for any brief summary remarks, opening remarks 10 here at the outset, and then again at 11:00 as 11 we move into the second phase of this meeting 12 dealing with standards to make those opening

13 remarks. 14 Following that presentation on the 15 framework for the Energy Conservation 16 Standards, the Overview, Scope of Coverage, 17 Market and Technology, Screening Analysis,

18 we'll break for lunch around about 12:15 or 19 so. We'll just see how that stacks up because 20 the cafeteria gets pretty busy around there. 21 Following lunch, Engineering 22 Analysis, Product Price Determination, Energy

### 202-234-4433 Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Page 9 1 Use. We'll break mid-afternoon. We do 2 anticipate that we're going to be here for the 3 full day today. 4 Following the mid-afternoon break, 5 Life-Cycle Cost, Payback Period, and Shipment 6 Analyses; National Impact Analysis, NOPR 7 Analyses and Next Steps. There's yet another 8 opportunity at the end of the day for any 9 final comments, any additional issues that any 10 individual wishes to raise, and we'll have a 11 few closing remarks. So, somewhere between 12 4:30 and 5:00 today we'll probably be 13 finished. 14 So, that's the plan for today. 15 Questions and comments on the plan; the 16 agenda, as written? 17 I would ask for your consideration. 18 Please speak one at a time. Please say your 19 name each time you speak for the record. 20 There will be a complete transcript of this 21 meeting made available by the Department. I'm 22 going to be queuing individuals by name as

### 202-234-4433 Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Page 10 1 best I can to speak. I also wish to encourage 2 follow-on comments. That's frequently helpful 3 for the Department to have that back and

4 forth. 5 Please keep the focus here. Turn 6 your cell phones on silent mode and limit 7 sidebar conversations. These mics when 8 they're on actually work pretty well these 9 days, so we can hear you. Please be concise, 10 share the air time. 11 I think those are the preliminary 12 items, so shall we move directly to the 13 opening statements, or do you have any 14 preliminary slides? 15 MS. KAARSBERG: No, I don't, but I 16 did have a question on the webinar. 17 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: Turn your mic

18 on. 19 MS. KAARSBERG: On the webinar, do 20 you anticipate that we're going to need to 21 allocate some time for webinar input, how many 22 people have signed up?

### 202-234-4433 Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Page 11 1 PARTICIPANT: We have 20 folks on 2 the webinar right now. And if you want to

3 make an announcement -- 4 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: Okay. So, 5 Emily -- if you couldn't hear that, Emily said 6 there are 20 folks participating by webinar. 7 I'm remiss in not welcoming you already. Glad 8 to have you with us. 9 If you have questions or comments, 10 you can type them in on the screen as you 11 watch the slides, and we'll try and 12 incorporate them in the discussion as we go 13 along. 14 I'd also ask for those of you on 15 the web, please if you're calling in on a 16 telephone, please put your telephone on mute. 17 Yesterday when we did this meeting there was 18 feedback and echoing going on, and we'd like 19 to eliminate that, if at all possible. Not on 20 hold, because we'll get the hold signal, the 21 beep, beep, beep, beep stuff. 22 Okay. So, then let's start with

### 202-234-4433 Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Page 12 1 opening remarks. Did you have preliminary 2 slides before we do the opening remarks?

3 MS. KIENLE: We have some 4 preliminary slides, but you already covered 5 the basis of these. 6 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: Okay. So, 7 let's start with opening remarks, brief 8 summary comments surrounding issues that are 9 important to you related to test procedures. 10 DR. HAKKARAINEN: Pekka Hakkarainen 11 with Lutron. Regarding the public comment 12 period for the test procedures and the 13 framework documents, from my perspective the - 14 - seems that we would like to have more time 15 for the framework and test procedures seem 16 easier. So, I would like to ask for an 17 extension on the framework document. 18 MS. KOHL: Okay. 19 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: Betsy Kohl 20 says okay. 21 MS. KOHL: Betsy Kohl, DOE GC. Your 22 request is noted and we'll consider it. If an

### 202-234-4433 Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Page 13 1 extension is granted, it will be published in 2 the Federal Register. 3 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: Thank you. 4 Yes, Steve Rosenstock. 5 MR. ROSENSTOCK: Steve Rosenstock, 6 EEI. Just a quick follow-on. I know that 7 recently there have been requests for 8 extensions in the past, and sometimes those 9 requests were not published in the Federal 10 Register until like the day after the first 11 comment period. So, I mean, sometimes there 12 can be a timing issue with some of this. 13 As a stakeholder we want to follow 14 the procedures and everything, but sometimes 15 there can be a delay in some of these notices 16 such that the comments are due say October

st 17 31 , and the notice that it was extended 18 doesn't appear in the Federal Register until th 19 October 30 . Well, by then it's kind of too 20 late for stakeholders. 21 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: Betsy. 22 MS. KOHL: Betsy Kohl, DOE GC. You

### 202-234-4433 Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Page 14 1 can always revise and submit additional 2 comments, if the comment period is extended. 3 We do our best. There are sometimes 4 publication delays, but we'll try. 5 MR. ROSENSTOCK: Thank you.

6 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: If the 7 comment period were extended, Tina, would you 8 send out a note or something like that? 9 MS. KOHL: It's published in the 10 Federal Register. Betsy Kohl. If the comment 11 period is extended it's published in the 12 Federal Register. 13 MS. KAARSBERG: But just so you 14 know, I also have a mailing list that exceeds 15 500 people. And don't ask me how I know, that 16 I send out. Once the notice is published, I 17 just send out the link to it as an added 18 thing. I know a lot of you folks track the 19 Federal Register, but we do that. The date is 20 always actually set by the -- the date is 21 related to the Federal Register publication 22 date, so that's not something where, as we do

### 202-234-4433 Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Page 15 1 with some other things, we can put it on the 2 web and give you some kind of advance notice 3 once it's issued. 4 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: Okay. Any 5 additional opening statements related to the 6 test procedure? 7 (No response.)

8 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: No 9 additional. Okay. So, then let's proceed with 10 the presentation materials. Maureen of 11 Navigant. And I believe all of you have this 12 material. 13 MS. KIENLE: Okay. My name is 14 Maureen Kienle, and I'm with Navigant 15 Consulting. And I'm going to start off by 16 reviewing the purpose of today's public 17 meeting. 18 The purpose of today's public 19 meeting is to present DOE's proposed test 20 procedure for general service fluorescent 21 lamps, general service incandescent lamps, and 22 incandescent reflector lamps. And, also, to

### 202-234-4433 Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Page 16 1 present DOE's proposed framework for GSFL and 2 IRL Energy Conservation Standards. Also, to 3 invite comment on the Test Procedure Notice of 4 Proposed Rulemaking, and the Energy 5 Conservation Standards Framework document, to 6 discuss the next steps in these rulemakings, 7 and finally to invite participants to provide 8 summary comments or statements, and raise any 9 additional issues for discussion. 10 DOE welcomes comments, data, and 11 information concerning the Notice of Proposed 12 Rulemaking and the framework document. 13 Throughout the presentation we highlight 14 specific issues that we ask for comment on in 15 the Test Procedure NOPR and framework 16 document. 17 The issues are numbered in 18 accordance with these documents, and the links 19 to the NOPR and framework are provided on this 20 slide. 21 Please note the Test Procedure NOPR th 22 which was published on September 14 , 2011 has

### 202-234-4433 Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Page 17 1 a comment period of 75 days, which ends th 2 November 28 , 2011. The framework document th 3 which was also published September 14 , 2011 4 has a comment period of 45 days, and ends

st 5 October 31 , 2011. 6 MS. KOHL: Could I ask one question 7 here? 8 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: Betsy. 9 MS. KOHL: John, if you have a 10 requested length of the extension that would 11 be good to know, as well. You can think about 12 it but just let us know. 13 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: Okay. 14 MS. KIENLE: As mentioned in the 15 agenda, we will start out with the Test 16 Procedure NOPR for general service fluorescent 17 lamps, general service incandescent lamps, and 18 incandescent reflector lamps. 19 We will first provide an overview, 20 then go into the specific industry standards 21 that we're proposing to update. And, finally, 22 discuss the new test procedure on general

### 202-234-4433 Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Page 18 1 service incandescent lamp lifetime that we're 2 proposing to establish. 3 On this slide, we review the 4 regulatory history of the test procedure and 5 standard. The Energy Policy and Conservation 6 Act of 1975 established the Energy 7 Conservation Program for consumer products 8 other than automobiles, which included general 9 service fluorescent lamps, general service 10 incandescent lamps, and incandescent reflector 11 lamps. This Act also set forth the method for 12 developing the test procedure for these 13 covered products. 14 Then, in the 1994 interim rule and 15 subsequent 1997 final rule DOE established 16 test procedures for the general service 17 fluorescent lamps, general service 18 incandescent lamps, and incandescent reflector 19 lamps. The test procedures incorporated by 20 reference several ANSI and IESNA industry

21 standards. 22 The Energy Independence and

### 202-234-4433 Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Page 19 1 Security Act of 2007 required DOE to review 2 and revise its test procedures at least once 3 every seven years. It also established lamp 4 lifetime requirements for GSILs. 5 So, then in 2009 DOE reviewed and 6 revised test procedures for GSFLs, GSILs, and 7 IRLs. Also, in 2009 DOE adopted standards for 8 additional types of GSFLs and revised the test 9 procedures in order to be applicable to these 10 additional types of lamps, as well. 11 Finally, this current rulemaking is 12 another review and revision of the GSFL, GSIL, 13 and IRL test procedure per the seven-year 14 revision rule. This rulemaking will also 15 establish a test procedure for measuring 16 lifetime of GSILs. 17 So, on this slide we just wanted to 18 review the stages of the rulemaking and also 19 review some key dates. As we know, the NOPR th 20 was published on September 14 , 2011. We plan 21 to publish the final rule in January 2012 so 22 that it's in line with the EISA 2007

### 202-234-4433 Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Page 20 1 requirements. And then the projected 2 compliance date is June 2012. 3 So, as I mentioned, per EPCA DOE is 4 required to review and amend accordingly test 5 procedures at least once every seven years. 6 This process requires DOE to amend the test 7 procedure to improve measurement 8 representativeness or accuracy, or reduce 9 burden, or to determine that such amendments 10 are unnecessary. 11 For the NOPR, DOE examines industry 12 best practices and technical developments. In 13 doing so, this NOPR proposes amendments to 14 DOE's test procedures for GSFLs and GSILs. 15 Specifically, it is proposing to update 16 references to industry standards, and also to 17 establish a test procedure for measuring lamp 18 lifetime of GSILs. 19 At this time, DOE requests comment 20 on all aspects of DOE's test procedures, 21 including those that were not specifically 22 called out in the Test Procedure NOPR.

### 202-234-4433 Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Page 21 1 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: Comments on 2 the Test Procedure? No comments? Mike. 3 MR. McGARAGHAN: Mike McGaraghan, 4 California Utilities. I just wanted to ask a 5 question about something that appears in the 6 framework document that seems like it would be 7 really important to address in the test 8 procedure document, as well. 9 In the framework document, DOE 10 talks about a new potential metric it's 11 considering for IRLs, and I don't think you're 12 addressing what that test procedure would look 13 like in this NOPR for test procedures. 14 Does DOE have a plan, if they do 15 adopt that metric, to issue a supplemental 16 NOPR or some other strategy for hashing out 17 how that test procedure will look? 18 MS. KIENLE: Yes. I think if DOE 19 does end up adopting a new efficacy metric 20 then we would plan to put out a subsequent 21 document to support that test procedure, as

22 well.

### 202-234-4433 Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Page 22 1 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: Additional 2 comments? Tina.

3 MS. KAARSBERG: We are -- 4 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: Say your

5 name. 6 MS. KAARSBERG: Tina Kaarsberg. We 7 are looking at issues related to lamp 8 directionality, not looking at but we are 9 accepting comments or were accepting comments 10 in our RFI on lighting systems. So, there's 11 also that aspect of it rather than the 12 directionality, if that makes any sense. But 13 if such a NOPR were considered for IRL, it 14 would also be considered more broadly, it's 15 likely. 16 MS. CURRY: I have a -- so, for this 17 test procedure what exactly are you trying to 18 measure? It is just efficacy, are you trying 19 to measure directionality, are you trying to 20 define sort of beam quality? What exactly is 21 this test procedure going to be, and will it 22 be based on sort of industry standard or IES

### 202-234-4433 Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Page 23 1 acceptable test procedures? 2 MS. KAARSBERG: In the lighting 3 systems RFI we talked about some of the 4 lighting system standards that are out there 5 for NEMA. I think LM-6 or something.

6 MR. STEPHENS: LE6. 7 MS. KAARSBERG: Or LE, one of these 8 letters. But we have not made a proposal. We 9 are just in the very early preliminary stages. 10 It's not even really a proper rulemaking. 11 It's just a request for information. But I 12 just wanted to mention that this 13 directionality was also related to the 14 lighting systems. 15 MS. ANDERSON: NEMA will also have -

16 -

17 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: Susan.

18 MS. ANDERSON: Susan Anderson. NEMA 19 will also have some comments about suggested 20 values that should be looked at for reflective 21 lamps in our framework documents. 22 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: Okay. So,

### 202-234-4433 Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Page 24 1 some of this will be addressed there.

2 Other comments on these -- 3 responsive to this issue box, because we're

4 about to move on. 5 (No response.) 6 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: Okay. 7 MS. KIENLE: Okay. We will now go 8 into more detail on the proposed updates to 9 industry standards. 10 The chart on this slide outlines 11 the industry standards that the NOPR proposes 12 to update. For GSFLs this includes updating

13 current references to ANSI C78.81-2005 and 14 2003 to the latest 2010 version. ANSI C78.81 15 provides dimensional and electrical 16 characteristics of general service fluorescent 17 lamps.18 DOE is also proposing to update LM19 9 and LM-45 to their latest 2009 versions. 20 LM-9 is the main industry standard referenced 21 in DOE's test procedures for GSFLs. And LM-45 22 is the main industry standard referenced for

### 202-234-4433 Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Page 25 1 GSILs. They provide basic test procedures and 2 methodology for taking electrical and 3 photometric measurements. These references can 4 be found in 10 CFR Part 430, Subpart B, 5 Appendix R. 6 DOE determined the updated 7 standards offered more precise measurements 8 and provided further clarification to the DOE 9 test procedures. I'm now going to talk in 10 more detail about each of these proposed 11 updates. 12 DOE is proposing to update

13 references to ANSI C78.81-2005 and 2003 to the 14 latest 2010 version. As I mentioned, ANSI 15 C78.81 provides dimensional and electrical 16 characteristics for fluorescent lamps. 17 The major change in the latest 18 version is that it adds high frequency and low 19 frequency lamp specifications for 25 watt, 28 20 watt, and 30 watt reduced wattage four-foot T8 21 medium bi-pin lamps. 22 The low frequency ballast

### 202-234-4433 Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Page 26 1 specifications in ANSI C78.81-2010 for reduced 2 wattage lamps are identical to the 3 specifications that DOE currently directs 4 manufacturers to use, and are found in Section 5 4.1.2.1 of Appendix R. 6 Therefore, DOE does not expect updating to the 7 latest version will have an impact on measured 8 efficacy or increase testing burden. 9 Just a note, DOE will also continue 10 to require GSFL testing with low frequency 11 reference ballasts unless only high frequency 12 specifications are available in order to 13 maintain consistency and comparability. This 14 is because the industry standards still do not 15 provide the necessary high frequency ballast 16 specifications for all covered lamp types.17 DOE is also proposing to update LM18 9 to its latest 2009 version. The 2009 version 19 has four key updates. First, it provides more 20 information on conducting tests under high 21 frequency conditions by specifying the root 22 mean square voltage regulation thresholds,

### 202-234-4433 Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Page 27 1 instrument frequency response, reference 2 ballast impedance and circuit setup. Second, 3 it modifies the lamp stabilization method to 4 require more consecutive measurements to be 5 taken until the stability criterion is met. 6 Next, it specifies temperature and orientation 7 for the stabilization of T5 lamps. And, 8 finally, the updated version adds impedance 9 thresholds for voltage and current inputs to 10 the multimeter and power source. 11 DOE has tentatively concluded that 12 these changes would generally result in more 13 precise measurements, provide further 14 clarification, and align DOE's requirements 15 with current industry standards. Therefore, 16 DOE has tentatively concluded that these 17 changes will not have a significant impact on 18 measured efficacy or increase testing burden. 19 The main updates to the latest 20 version of LM-45 are shown on this slide. 21 First, the updated version of LM-45 modifies 22 the lamp stabilization method to require

### 202-234-4433 Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Page 28 1 stabilization measurements to continue until 2 the stability criterion is met. Second, it 3 modifies certain tolerances, including the 4 voltage and current regulation tolerances for 5 an AC power source. Third, it modifies the 6 instrument tolerances for AC voltage, current, 7 and wattage. The updated version also has 8 impedance thresholds for voltage and current 9 inputs to the multimeter. Finally, it adds a 10 requirement for the degree of spectral match 11 of the photo detector measurements to the V 12 lamba function, which quantifies the response 13 of the human eye to light. 14 DOE has tentatively concluded that 15 these changes would generally result in more 16 precise measurements, provide further 17 clarification, and align DOE's requirements 18 with current industry standards. Therefore, 19 DOE has tentatively concluded that these 20 changes will not have a significant impact on 21 measured efficacy or increase testing burden. 22 DOE requests comments on its

### 202-234-4433 Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Page 29 1 proposed incorporation of the 2009 versions of

2 LM-9 and LM-45. 3 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: Charlie 4 Stephens. 5 MR. STEPHENS: Charlie Stephens. I 6 have a question -- a couple of questions, 7 actually. Back on Slide 16, the additional 8 guidance for the high frequency testing, does 9 that specifically apply only to the four lamp 10 types that are -- that today have to be tested 11 at high frequencies because of the lack of a 12 low frequency ballast? 13 MS. KIENLE: No, it's not just the 14 reduced wattage lamps. 15 MR. STEPHENS: Okay. So, in theory 16 that could be applied to other lamp lengths 17 and wattages.

18 MS. KIENLE: That's correct. 19 MR. STEPHENS: Okay. My second 20 question has to do with the V lamba and 21 spectral match at the end. The explanation of 22 that in the material was not very clear to me.

### 202-234-4433 Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Page 30 1 I couldn't after reading that draw any 2 conclusion, so I'm a little -- is there 3 somebody who could explain that a little more 4 clearly so that DOE's conclusion that it 5 doesn't have an impact, so I could kind of 6 come to that same conclusion myself? No one 7 intimately familiar with LM-45? 8 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: Susan, do you

9 want to -- 10 MS. ANDERSON: Well, our testing 11 experts are not here today, so they will be in 12 our written comments. 13 MR. STEPHENS: Okay. I guess I'd ask 14 DOE if they wouldn't mind to make a little bit 15 of an attempt to re-explain that in a way that 16 makes sense to somebody who's trying to 17 understand whether it actually makes a 18 difference or not. 19 MS. KIENLE: Okay.

20 MR. STEPHENS: I have no reason to 21 believe one way or the other, but I'd kind of 22 like to understand it a little better.

### 202-234-4433 Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Page 31 1 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: Okay. 2 MS. KIENLE: Okay, thank you. 3 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: So, you can 4 see the request for comment on these two. 5 Additional questions or comments? 6 (No response.)

7 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: I see no 8 additional comments. Okay, so we'll just 9 press on. 10 MS. KIENLE: Okay, we'll continue

11 then. 12 The existing IRL test procedure 13 incorporates by reference IESNA LM-20-1994 for 14 measuring efficacy of IRLs. This test 15 procedure is referenced in 10 CFR Part 430, 16 Subpart B, Appendix R. 17 At the time of publication of this 18 NOPR, a revised edition of this standard has 19 not yet been published. DOE is also not aware 20 of any best practices or technical 21 developments that necessitate further 22 modifications. Therefore, no amendments to

### 202-234-4433 Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Page 32 1 the IRL test procedure are proposed in this

2 NOPR. 3 DOE requests comment on whether any 4 amendments to the IRL test procedure are 5 necessary.

6 MS. KIENLE: Susan?

7 MS. ANDERSON: Susan Anderson. I 8 mean, if we are going to look at a new metric 9 for IRL, then we are going to need to look at 10 something other than lumens per watt and 11 review the entire test procedure. I mean, the 12 characteristics that you normally look at when 13 you're looking at directional light sources 14 are center beam candlepower, beam angle, which 15 is 50 percent of center beam candlepower, and 16 field angle which is 10 percent of center beam 17 candlepower. And then there's another term 18 generally used called beam spread that does 19 not have a definition, where the others are 20 defined by the IES. So, if we're going to 21 talk about beam spread, then we will need to 22 come up with a definition for beam spread.

### 202-234-4433 Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Page 33 1 And that's actually already a topic with ANSI

2 and the IEC. 3 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: They're 4 working on it now? They are. Mimi Gupta. 5 MS. GUPTA: Yes, Mimi Gupta. Yes, 6 if DOE decides to adopt a new metric in the 7 standards rulemaking, it will likely start a 8 whole new rulemaking to establish a test 9 procedure for that metric. 10 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: Okay. Mike? 11 MR. McGARAGHAN: Mike McGaraghan. I 12 would just point out that in the recent 13 ballast rulemaking, I believe DOE published 14 the new test procedure right around the same 15 time as the NOPR. And there wasn't enough 16 time, or enough data with that -- testing data 17 with that new test procedure to get to a final 18 rule in that short window. So, obviously, the 19 more time that everyone has to see the test 20 procedure before getting to later stages of 21 the standards rulemaking the better. 22 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: Okay.

### 202-234-4433 Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Page 34 1 Additional comments here? Susan. 2 MS. ANDERSON: One thing that we've 3 noted during our NEMA discussions is that many 4 labs are not yet accredited to the 2009 5 version of LM-9, and that we aren't sure that 6 accreditation is actually available through 7 NVLAP as yet. So, that's something that needs 8 to be pursued. 9 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: Mimi. 10 MS. GUPTA: What do you mean the 11 lamps are not accredited?

12 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: Labs. 13 MS. GUPTA: Oh, the labs. Oh, okay.

14 MS. ANDERSON: Labs. 15 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: Okay. How 16 does that -- so, is that --

17 MS. ANDERSON: NVLAP would need to 18 update their accreditation. 19 MR. COOKE: First. And then they'd 20 go through and improve the individual 21 laboratories to that specific version of the 22 test procedure.

### 202-234-4433 Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Page 35 1 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: I see. 2 MR. COOKE: So, if you expect this 3 to become effective by June of 2012, there may 4 not be any labs capable of running the test.

5 That's the concern. 6 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: Yes. I didn't 7 get your name before. 8 MS. CURRY: Oh, Ku'uipo Curry. 9 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: Thank you. 10 MS. CURRY: With regards to LM-9 and 11 NVLAP there's a lot of accreditation bodies 12 that Energy Star -- that are accrediting 13 laboratories to LM-9, and you can definitely 14 find a list of those laboratories on 15 EnergyStar.gov/lighting labs. 16 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: Okay. 17 MS. CURRY: And, basically, go and 18 look at the laboratories that are recognized 19 for fluorescent testing. 20 MS. ANDERSON: Our concern is that 21 they are accredited to the 2009 version. 22 MS. CURRY: It's very possible they

### 202-234-4433 Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Page 36 1 are, so if that's something that you wanted to 2 check out, you could definitely check that 3 website. 4 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: Okay. 5 Thanks, Susan and Ku'uipo. Steve? 6 MR. ROSENSTOCK: Steve Rosenstock, 7 EEI. Just kind of follow-up on the timing 8 here. It says according to the schedule that 9 DOE wants to publish a final rule by January 10 for all the covered products, and it seems 11 like for the IRLs, if there is a new metric 12 decided upon or agreed upon, they might -- I 13 don't know if DOE has -- is it going to be 14 able to open up that final rule for 15 supplemental final rule if there's a new 16 metric which would require a new test 17 procedure all the lamps that -- well, I guess 18 maybe not for July 2012, but for the future 19 ones. So, again, there might be a timing 20 issue here. 21 MS. KAARSBERG: This is Tina. 22 That's a very good concern, and so it's much -

### 202-234-4433 Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Page 37 1 - the much more likely scenario is that if we 2 come up with a new metric as part of the 3 framework, the standard that we're just 4 starting has a new metric it then starts a new 5 test procedure proceedings. So, that would 6 start at the same time if that were the case. 7 And that's just a more likely scenario. I 8 wouldn't rule anything out at this point in my 9 life, but your concern is duly noted. 10 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: Okay. Final 11 comments on this section? Tim Ballo. 12 MR. BALLO: I have one follow-up to 13 Charlie's question on the value for the photo 14 detector spectral responsivity. I, obviously, 15 don't know what that means, but I note in the 16 Federal Register Notice that commercial grade 17 units have a tolerance of about 5 percent, and 18 then what's considered the laboratory research 19 quality units have a 3 percent tolerance. Why 20 are the 3 percent tolerance units not suitable 21 for use for testing? 22 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: Mimi Gupta.

### 202-234-4433 Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Page 38 1 MS. GUPTA: I would have to defer to 2 the testing experts for some more 3 clarification on that, and DOE can definitely 4 look into that issue a little bit more as 5 Charlie asked for. But I think our 6 preliminary determination was that increase in 7 the tolerance would not significantly affect 8 the efficacy, the measured efficacy. And 9 that's why we felt the benefits of aligning 10 better with the industry standard were 11 worthwhile to adopt this provision. 12 MS. CURRY: Ku'uipo Curry. Just to 13 give you some sense, NVLAP Laboratories have 14 to be within 2 percent tolerance of each 15 other, so it's not 3 percent and 5 percent, 16 it's outside what would be acceptable for 17 NVLAP Laboratories to remain accredited. 18 MR. BALLO: Well, that suggests that 19 you'd want to use the 2 percent value in the 20 regs then. 21 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: Okay. Thanks, 22 Tim. Any comment on that? Pekka?

### 202-234-4433 Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Page 39 1 DR. HAKKARAINEN: Nothing specific. 2 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: Okay. So, 3 then moving on. 4 MS. KIENLE: Okay. Now, I will go 5 over the new proposed test procedure for GSIL 6 lifetime testing. EISA 2007 amended EPCA by 7 prescribing GSIL minimum rated lifetime 8 requirements which are to be phased in between 9 January 2012 and January 2014. 10 DOE's proposal for the GSIL 11 lifetime test procedure contains a proposed 12 industry standard, definition, and sample 13 size. 14 The industry standard that DOE is 15 proposing to reference is IESNA LM-49-2001, 16 the IESNA Approved Method for Life Testing of 17 Incandescent Filament Lamps. We found this to 18 be widely used in industry. The standard’s 19 procedure also generally coincides with the 20 rated voltage testing guidelines provided in 21 the IESNA lighting handbook. Additionally, the 22 standard is referenced by the Federal Trade

### 202-234-4433 Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Page 40 1 Commission in its regulations for product 2 labeling. 3 DOE is proposing that the rated 4 lifetime for general service incandescent 5 lamps be defined as the length of operating 6 time between first use and failure of 50 7 percent of the prescribed sample size. This 8 definition is based on EPCA's definition of 9 the rated lifetime with the exception that DOE 10 is proposing a prescribed sample size. It's 11 also similar to the rated lifetime definition 12 found in LM-49. 13 Finally, DOE is proposing to 14 specify a sample size of 20 lamps, which I'll 15 go into further detail on later. 16 On this slide we're presenting a 17 brief summary of IESNA LM-49 regarding the 18 test setup, conditions, and methodology. This 19 proposed standard prescribes lifetime testing 20 to be conducted at the rated voltage of the 21 lamp. It requires the lamp to be checked for 22 failure at regular intervals and cooled on a

### 202-234-4433 Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Page 41 1 daily basis. Provides instrument 2 specifications for voltage, current, and 3 frequency; specifies test conditions for 4 vibration, temperature and air flow; and, 5 finally, addresses orientation, spacing, 6 handling, marking of lamps, and lamp holder 7 specifications. 8 DOE is also proposing to disallow 9 the use of accelerated lifetime testing. 10 Accelerated lifetime testing involves 11 operating lamps at overvoltage which increases 12 operating temperature and shortens lamp 13 lifetime. It also involves using empirically 14 derived scaling factors to determine the full 15 lifetime of lamps. 16 LM49 allows accelerated lifetime 17 testing but only for non-halogen GSILs. 18 However, very few non-halogen GSILs will meet 19 the 2012 Energy Conservation standards. 20 Accurate accelerated lifetime testing can also 21 be difficult to conduct for halogen lamps due 22 to the tungsten halogen regenerative cycle.

### 202-234-4433 Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Page 42 1 This cycle redeposits evaporated tungsten back 2 onto the filament and is designed around 3 certain operating temperatures. Any deviations 4 from the rated voltage would change the 5 operating temperature and can potentially 6 alter or introduce new modes of lamp failure. 7 Additionally, another reason DOE is 8 disallowing the use of accelerated lifetime 9 testing is that accurate scaling factors 10 require numerous comparison tests, and need to 11 be developed for each lamp design.

12 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: Steve

13 Rosenstock. 14 MR. ROSENSTOCK: Steve Rosenstock, 15 EEI. I understand this, but I'm kind of 16 curious. Some of the halogen lamps I've seen 17 out there are rated at 4,000 and 6,000 hours, 18 so you can't use accelerated lifetime testing 19 in the traditional test procedure with three 20 hours on, three hours off. It could take quite 21 a while to -- you could take a year, or over a 22 year to do the non-accelerated lifetime

### 202-234-4433 Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Page 43 1 testing, and I'm just kind of curious -- 2 again, I'm sure the manufacturers have more 3 information. 4 Couldn't that also be a timing 5 issue if certain lifetime standards are set 6 between January '12 and 2014? 7 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: Tina. 8 MS. KAARSBERG: I guess I would say 9 that's a really good concern, and it's noted. 10 I guess in my response, my understanding is 11 the standard is only 1,000 hours. I mean, this 12 is not for them to rate -- right, 1,000 hours 13 for incandescents in EISA? 14 MS. KIENLE: Right. 15 MS. KAARSBERG: Right. So, even -- 16 so, with this test procedure -- I thought the 17 purpose of the test procedure was just to 18 prove that they're meeting the 1,000 hour 19 standards. But if it's, in fact, also being 20 used to verify their -- what is that term you 21 guys use, the representations about being -- 22 having a lifetime of 4,000, which is the

### 202-234-4433 Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Page 44 1 case, Charlie is nodding at me, then I guess 2 that's a good thing for us to examine. 3 We had been thinking about -- at 4 least I had been thinking about only in terms 5 of the 1,000 hour requirement. 6 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: Susan, Keith. 7 MR. COOKE: Yes, the other thing 8 we'd like to recommend from a NEMA perspective 9 is that we actually allow the product approval 10 at 40 percent of the lifetime testing to allow 11 commercialization, but then the testing 12 continues until it's completed, so it would 13 allow you to go ahead and go to market sooner 14 than a complete test. 15 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: Is that in 16 the IES specification, or -- 17 MR. COOKE: No, this would be a 18 change to that. 19 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: Okay. 20 MR. COOKE: But it does address

21 Steve's concern. 22 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: Okay.

### 202-234-4433 Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Page 45 1 MR. BOESENBERG: And this is Alex 2 Boesenberg of NEMA. I think Ku'uipo can 3 correct me if I'm wrong, but I think Energy 4 Star has some provisions in some of the specs 5 where, again, like Keith said, at 40 percent 6 of testing we can commercialize. You are 7 required to finish the testing and finish 8 reporting. If you fail, of course, you have to 9 pull the product, but otherwise it allows 10 folks to get things on the shelves faster. 11 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: Okay. Now, 12 I'm getting it. Ku'uipo. 13 MS. CURRY: That's generally for 14 CFLs, but yes, I mean, that's basically the 15 approach that's taken. 16 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: For Energy

17 Star. 18 MS. CURRY: That's right. 19 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: Okay. Mike, 20 do you have a comment, question? 21 MR. McGARAGHAN: Mike McGaraghan. I 22 just wanted to make sure I was clear on that.

### 202-234-4433 Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Page 46 1 Is that allowance perpetual, or is that in 2 this case you're proposing that we would use 3 it just to meet the time line of this 2012

4 standard? 5 MR. COOKE: It would be perpetual. 6 It would be ongoing. 7 MS. GUPTA: This is Mimi Gupta from 8 Navigant. I mean, I'd just like to note that 9 right now there is an option for manufacturers 10 before the full year of testing and sampling 11 is complete to submit an initial certification 12 report to DOE based on preliminary test 13 results, and that way they can go to market 14 with their product before a full year of 15 sampling and testing is complete. 16 MR. COOKE: And we agree, that was 17 never mentioned, though, in this document.

18 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: Thanks.

19 Steve. 20 MS. GUPTA: I think it was.

21 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: Pekka. 22 DR. HAKKARAINEN: Pekka Hakkarainen,

### 202-234-4433 Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Page 47 1 Lutron. I'll preface my comment by saying 2 that I'm not a lamp designer, but I'm 3 surprised about the comment about the halogen 4 regenerative cycle here. It has been my 5 understanding that it comes into play at 6 significantly lower voltages than the rated 7 voltage. And if you're operating at higher 8 voltages, that that's not a concern. So, I 9 would suggest that you examine that issue 10 relative to the statement about accelerated 11 life testing for halogen lamps. 12 MS. GUPTA: Okay. We'll look into 13 that, as well. 14 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: Okay. Susan. 15 MS. ANDERSON: The halogen cycle 16 does drop out when the temperature gets too 17 low, so it is critical at lower temperatures, 18 not higher temperatures. 19 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: Thank you. 20 Other comments on this series of issues? 21 MS. CURRY: Ku'uipo Curry. There's a 22 -- I have a comment about using IESNA on 49-

### 202-234-4433 Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Page 48 1 2001. Do you want me to save that? 2 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: Can you speak 3 a little louder?

4 MS. CURRY: I have a comment about 5 using the IES-49-2001. Do you want me to talk 6 about that now, or later?

7 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: Please. 8 MS. CURRY: Basically, IESNA 9 documents or IES LMs, basically are withdrawn 10 after 10 years, so LM49-2001 is going to be 11 withdrawn at the end of this year, which is 12 problematic if you need to accredit 13 laboratories to that test procedure. If they 14 don't already own that test procedure and have 15 that in their laboratories, they cannot be 16 accredited to that test procedure. So, 17 assuming that you're using NVLAP Laboratories 18 that need to be accredited to LM-49-2001, if 19 they aren't already accredited to that test 20 procedure, they won't be able to be accredited 21 to that test procedure in the future. 22 I'm not sure if LM-49 is being --

### 202-234-4433 Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Page 49 1 is slated to be renewed, if they're working 2 on a revision to it, but it could be helpful 3 to get in touch with the head of the IES TPC 4 and ask them whether this is the appropriate

5 standard. 6 Worst case scenario, you would 7 require this and then it would essentially be 8 a withdrawn test procedure. 9 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: Okay. We have 10 a comment from someone who is joining us via 11 the webinar, and the comment reads, "NVLAP 12 accredits for all versions of LMs in 13 discussion from 1993 forward. IES LM," I 14 think that's 45, "is not descriptive in the 15 regards to lamp stabilization. The stated 16 method is recommended but other acceptance 17 criterion and measurement intervals are18 recognized. Does DOE intend to accept the LM19 45 guidance as provided as recommendation and 20 not a requirement?" And maybe we could -- 21 MS. GUPTA: You might have to repeat 22 that question. Sorry.

### 202-234-4433 Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Page 50 1 MS. CURRY: It started out with -- 2 MS. GUPTA: So, they're talking 3 about the -- it sounds like they're talking 4 about some of the other industry test 5 procedures that we're updating. This is not 6 the lifetime --

7 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: Yes? 8 MS. GUPTA: Okay. 9 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: So, Mimi, 10 what's your conclusion? 11 MS. GUPTA: So, my colleague is 12 saying that yes, we are looking at it as a 13 recommendation. 14 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: Okay. Who 15 wrote this in?

16 PARTICIPANT: Ronald. 17 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: Okay, Ronald. 18 Okay. 19 MS. ANDERSON: It might be Dr. Ron

20 Baback. 21 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: Okay. Keith. 22 MR. COOKE: Keith Cooke, Philips.

### 202-234-4433 Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Page 51 1 Another concern that we'd like to express is 2 that we believe that this testing should only 3 be required once for the product unless the 4 product goes through any major changes, as 5 opposed to on an annual basis. That would be 6 a significant burden. 7 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: Okay, thank 8 you. Other comments on this series of issues? 9 (No response.) 10 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: Okay. 11 MS. KIENLE: Okay. As mentioned 12 previously, DOE is proposing a sample size of 13 20 lamps for GSIL lifetime testing. DOE is 14 proposing to require a minimum of two lamps 15 per month for seven months of production out 16 of a 12-month period. 17 DOE chose to propose a sample size 18 of 20 because DOE believes that 20 is a 19 statistically large group of lamps. This 20 number is also consistent with the 21 lamps 21 required for lamp efficacy measurements. 22 Additionally, we're proposing an even number

### 202-234-4433 Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Page 52 1 rather than 21 because rated lifetime is 2 dependent on the operating time of 50 percent 3 of the sample size. 4 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: Keith? 5 MR. COOKE: Okay. Bear me with, I'm 6 not a statistician, but one of our 7 statisticians did want to make a comment on 8 this. 9 We agree with the proposal, but we 10 have to give due consideration to the 11 implications of doing it. We supported the 12 minimum size of 20, but we also strongly 13 opposed the notion that the tenth lamp to fail 14 represents an unbiased estimate of the median 15 life. Only in the case of an odd number of 16 test samples does the middle or median rank 17 lamp fully represent an unbiased estimate of 18 the medium lamp life. 19 Further, the failure rate as 20 measured on how many lamps are failing per 21 unit time at a given moment or during an 22 interval, the 50 percent failure rate is not

### 202-234-4433 Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Page 53 1 the definition of median lamp life. For more 2 information, consult Basic Statistical 3 Reliability books on the topic, blah, blah,

4 blah. 5 We prefer the use of distributional 6 analysis for determination of median lamp 7 life. If you decide to facilitate the 8 calculation of the 50 percent failure rate, 9 you should use the middle lamp of an odd 10 number of samples. Is the way the -- 11 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: So, let me 12 just clarify. So, then does that mean you're 13 not supportive of 20, and you'd rather have it 14 21? I didn't get that. 15 MR. COOKE: We're saying you could 16 go either way. 17 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: Okay. 18 MR. COOKE: But what we're saying 19 is, is you have to very careful on how you 20 define the median.

21 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: Alex? 22 MR. BOESENBERG: Alex Boesenberg,

### 202-234-4433 Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Page 54 1 NEMA. So, logically, you still have to test th 2 for that 11 lamp failure, whether it's 20 or 3 21. Statistically speaking you have to see -- 4 you have to go past the middle. 5 MR. COOKE: Right. 6 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: Okay. 7 MR. BOESENBERG: And since I have 8 the floor, I have noted conversationally, and 9 we will supply additional written comments 10 regarding what I'll call some consistent 11 concerns with statistical analysis for this 12 and some of the other rulemakings. 13 First comes to mind is the 14 fluorescent ballast test rulemaking that we 15 commented on the statistic -- some of the 16 statistical assumptions or conclusions from 17 the Department. 18 It's sort of clear to me that your 19 statisticians and our statisticians don't 20 agree. And we have -- we're not sure yet how 21 we want to address that, but we know that we 22 do want to address it. We have contacted an

### 202-234-4433 Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Page 55 1 outside entity, a professional statistician, a 2 professor of statistics back when we were 3 commenting on the fluorescent ballast NOPR, 4 and he -- based on what little we sent him, he 5 bore out our argument. So, naturally, we wish 6 to proceed with that, and hopefully provide 7 him more data so that he can reach an 8 independent conclusion. 9 So, to cut it short, we have some 10 concerns about how each side are performing 11 their statistical analysis, and we would like 12 to work with you specifically on that as a 13 general topic versus continually hammering 14 away at one little minor point in these 15 different NOPRs. 16 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: Okay, thank 17 you. Charlie Stephens. 18 MR. STEPHENS: Charlie Stephens. As 19 long as we're going to get the statisticians 20 to work, I wouldn't mind having them look at 21 the interaction between the test procedure 22 statistician work and the reporting number.

### 202-234-4433 Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Page 56 1 I'm strongly suspicious that when we go into 2 the market I'm not going to see a lamp 3 lifetime on my package that says 1,027 hours, 4 or 1,042 hours, or whatever. So, I think -- 5 I'd like to know what the tolerance is for 6 reporting a number, and how it statistically 7 bears to the tested hours, and whether or not 8 I should even be concerned if there's an issue 9 there about reporting and testing. 10 MR. BOESENBERG: Alex Boesenberg, 11 NEMA. That's a very valid question. 12 Incidentally, that's the Federal Trade 13 Commission. It's a different body, and I can 14 provide you some information on that. 15 MR. STEPHENS: Okay. I'd like to 16 know about the statistics behind that, and 17 what statistical requirements are in play for 18 that particular piece. 19 MR. BOESENBERG: Ultimately, it was 20 a rounding decision.

21 MR. STEPHENS: To the nearest? 22 MR. BOESENBERG: Exactly. It depends

### 202-234-4433 Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Page 57 1 on the lumens range you're talking about. It's 2 somewhat arbitrary. 3 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: Okay. Do you

4 have a follow-on comment? 5 DR. HAKKARAINEN: Pekka Hakkarainen. 6 I have a different comment.

7 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: Go ahead.

8 DR. HAKKARAINEN: Not a follow-on on 9 this particular topic.

10 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: Yes. 11 DR. HAKKARAINEN: I'm just curious 12 here, when you're saying that the testing 13 would require a minimum of two lamps over a 14 seven-month production period, does that mean 15 that new products cannot be placed into market 16 before there is seven months worth of 17 production, plus the 1,000 hours of testing to 18 median life? 19 MS. GUPTA: Yes, I think the next -- 20 this is Mimi Gupta. I think the next slide 21 will discuss that. As I mentioned before, DOE 22 is proposing that there be an initial

### 202-234-4433 Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Page 58 1 certification based on whatever engineering 2 and technical data that manufacturers may have 3 on their product before distribution of 4 products, and then after one year of sampling 5 and testing have occurred, manufacturers will 6 have to submit the final certification report 7 based on the full testing procedure. 8 DR. HAKKARAINEN: Okay. This is 9 Pekka, again. What happens in the event that 10 there is a disagreement between the 11 engineering analysis that is used for placing 12 a product on the market and the testing that 13 is conducted a year later? 14 MS. GUPTA: A disagreement meaning 15 that the product is actually not compliant? 16 DR. HAKKARAINEN: Okay, I'll accept 17 that example. 18 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: Betsy. 19 MS. KOHL: Betsy Kohl, DOE GC. I 20 think the previous sale would be a question 21 for our enforcement folks. And if you want to 22 submit a comment, I can have Laura Barhydt,

### 202-234-4433 Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Page 59 1 who's our enforcement attorney, take a look at 2 that. But I think, certainly, for the most3 recent testing data, if it shows non4 compliance, you would need to stop selling 5 them until it's fixed. But the previous was a 6 question for our enforcement folks.

7 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: Steve

8 Rosenstock.

9 MR. ROSENSTOCK: Steve Rosenstock. I 10 guess this comes in, and just because of the 11 EISA 2007, putting that minimum lifetime 12 requirement now, so I guess if there were 13 changes compared to the traditional ones -- 14 again, I haven't looked at EISA 2007. I 15 believe they were mostly 1,000 hours, but if 16 there were any changes that were different 17 from I'll say traditional lifetimes, that's 18 where this all could really play an impact. 19 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: Okay. Keith? 20 MR. COOKE: An additional comment. 21 NEMA overall, I think, opposes the expansion 22 of the incandescent lamp test requirements

### 202-234-4433 Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Page 60 1 beyond that's required by EISA, especially 2 annual testing. It's a significant burden. 3 We understand that it is required 4 for EISA, and we have no problem with that. 5 Standing beyond that, we question the 6 authority of the DOE to do that. So, as a 7 result, we also are concerned about the 8 proposed seven, now 12-month sampling 9 requirements as referenced in the document 10 being extended to these other lamps, as well. 11 We don't believe that it really has 12 applicability. 13 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: Okay. Just 14 to confirm, these detailed comments you'll 15 submit in writing?

16 MR. COOKE: Yes.

17 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: Yes. Thank 18 you. Okay. So, additional questions or 19 comments on these issues? 20 (No response.) 21 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: Okay. 22 MS. KIENLE: Okay. So, here we're

### 202-234-4433 Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Page 61 1 going to address the proposed filing 2 requirements for new GSIL models. And they're 3 going to be similar to that of GSFLs and IRLs. 4 First, the initial certification 5 report, which describes the methodology used 6 to determine that the model meets or exceeds 7 standards is to be submitted prior to or 8 concurrent with the distribution of a new 9 model. And then the final certification 10 report based on full sampling provisions is to 11 be submitted one year following the start of 12 the manufacturing of the new model. DOE 13 requests comment on its proposal regarding 14 GSIL certification filing requirements. 15 DOE has also determined no 16 significant economic impact on a substantial 17 number of small entities. DOE seeks comment 18 regarding this conclusion. 19 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: So, we have 20 two comment boxes there on contiguous slides. 21 Keith?

22 MR. COOKE: Yes. On the last one --

### 202-234-4433 Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Page 62 1 Keith Cooke from Philips. 2 We believe that there is a 3 significant potential impact here. We 4 actually went through and did an analysis on 5 what the cost would be of setting up one of 6 these racks in order to perform the testing, 7 and it's not insignificant. 8 The rack itself would cost almost 9 $28,000, the sockets is $1,400, the regulator 10 to run it would be $40,000, power drops 11 $1,500, labor for the drops would be 18.5, the 12 rack labor would be $20,000, to install the 13 regulator would be $10,000, for a total of 14 $132,800. And then on top of that to run the 15 testing each year would be an additional 16 $60,000. So, for the small manufacturers this 17 is a significant burden.

18 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: Susan? 19 MS. ANDERSON: And for larger 20 manufacturers that manufacture in multiple 21 locations, I mean this cost would be repeated 22 in each manufacturing location.

### 202-234-4433 Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Page 63 1 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: Okay. Mike? 2 MR. McGARAGHAN: Mike McGaraghan. 3 Keith, I wonder if you could just elaborate on 4 what components of the test procedure you're 5 referring to that would add up to those

6 amounts? 7 MR. COOKE: This is for the lifetime 8 testing. 9 MR. McGARAGHAN: Just the lifetime.

10 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: And that's 11 all the infrastructure for the lifetime 12 testing.

13 MR. COOKE: Correct. 14 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: Okay. 15 MR. McGARAGHAN: And are you 16 proposing an alternative of some sort, or 17 suggesting that any lifetime testing is a 18 significant burden of that order? 19 MR. COOKE: For all the products 20 that are covered under this framework, and all 21 the requirements that are laid out in this 22 thing, that's what's required. What we're

### 202-234-4433 Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Page 64 1 saying is either we cut out some of the 2 products, or we cut out some of the testing. 3 We believe that the testing really is beyond 4 the DOE's auspices, anyway. 5 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: So, I was 6 unclear. I was unclear if Keith, either you or 7 NEMA are making a recommendation for how the 8 Department of Energy should proceed with this.

9 Alex? 10 MR. BOESENBERG: This is Alex 11 Boesenberg, NEMA. The hedge my bet response is 12 we are still working on our comments. 13 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: Okay. 14 MR. BOESENBERG: Which is quite 15 true. The numbers Keith supplied, obviously, 16 are pertinent to one company. I have those 17 figures, however, circulating among my 18 membership for confirmation. At least one has 19 already confirmed that -- but I had no dissent 20 when those numbers were floated, so that will 21 be part of our comments. As far as what Keith 22 said, where we'll draw the line between

### 202-234-4433 Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Page 65 1 exempting some products versus reduction of 2 testing, we haven't reached that conclusion 3 yet. 4 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: Okay. Thanks 5 for that clarity. Yes, Tina?

6 MS. KAARSBERG: I had a follow-on 7 question. It would be really helpful if you 8 could provide costs, sort of net costs, costs 9 added on to what you already have to do for 10 other things just to kind of us give us a 11 sense of what the relative costs are. And if 12 you do end up suggesting an alternative having 13 those costs would also be quite helpful. And 14 the more apples-to-apples, if I can use that 15 term, these costs comparisons are, the better 16 for us. Thank you. 17 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: Yes. So, 18 you've already initiated among your members 19 that they compare and validate those costs, so 20 that's also very helpful. Alex, go ahead. 21 No? Okay. Yes, Mike? 22 MR. McGARAGHAN: Sorry, one more

### 202-234-4433 Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Page 66 1 clarification. Those numbers were assuming 2 that you're not allowed to do accelerated 3 testing, or it doesn't matter? 4 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: Keith? 5 MR. COOKE: It doesn't matter, 6 because you'd still have to have all of those 7 different facilities, even if it's accelerated 8 life testing. 9 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: Okay. So, 10 additional comments on this series? 11 (No response.) 12 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: I'm looking 13 at Maureen. Did they address issue eight? 14 MS. KIENLE: Yes, I think we 15 discussed that previously -- 16 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: Okay. 17 MS. KIENLE: -- actually before we 18 got to this slide. 19 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: Great. Okay. 20 So, then let's put the next slide up there. 21 MS. KIENLE: Okay. Finally, this 22 slide provides information on submitting

### 202-234-4433 Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Page 67 1 comments on the NOPR. Comments can be 2 submitted by email, postal mail or courier. 3 And please note again the comment period for th 4 the test procedure ends November 28 , 2011 at 5 midnight. 6 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: So, I think 7 we're about ready to take a break, as 8 described in the agenda, and where we are in 9 terms of the content. Let me thank those are 10 listening via the web. If you have questions 11 and comments, please try and send them in and 12 try and keep them short, and we'll try and 13 introduce them into the conversation here in 14 the Forrestal Building. 15 It's now 10 after 10:00. Let's 16 take a 15-minute break, which means we'll 17 resume at 10:25 in this room. This room will 18 be -- people will be in here so you can leave 19 your stuff. Please, you need to have your 20 badge visible as you walk around the Forrestal 21 Building. And I think most of you are 22 familiar with the building. There are

### 202-234-4433 Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Page 68 1 restrooms on both ends of the halls. There's 2 a coffee shop on the ground floor directly 3 beneath us almost, but don't tarry. Go 4 quickly, because we will resume at 10:25. 5 Okay. We'll see you back here then. 6 (Whereupon, the proceedings went 7 off the record at 10:09 a.m., and went back on 8 the record at 10:25 a.m.) 9 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: So, let's 10 start it back up then. Welcome back. As Tina 11 was just describing, we're making the 12 transition to the standards segment of this 13 day, and as we promised, we wanted to provide 14 an opportunity for summary remarks, key issues 15 that anybody that wants to might raise right 16 now. Alex, you want to start? Yes, Alex. 17 MR. BOESENBERG: This is Alex 18 Boesenberg of NEMA. It looks like three 19 pages, but I made the type really big so I 20 could read it easily. And I apologize if it 21 sounds like I'm reading a script, but what I 22 have here -- and I'll also provide an

### 202-234-4433 Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Page 69 1 electronic copy as part of the comments. These 2 are several noteworthy concerns that NEMA and 3 its members have specifically regarding the 4 framework document, so I'll just get right to 5 it. 6 So, NEMA and its members, as 7 always, want to thank the Department of Energy 8 and its staff for the many years of 9 collaboration and commitment that we've 10 displayed in working together with industry 11 and other stakeholders to pursue sensible 12 product regulation with the goal of improving 13 product efficiency and performance for that 14 nation as a whole. 15 Regarding today's subject, the 16 framework document for GSFL and IRL, we have 17 several very strong concerns over the timing, 18 the approach, and the feasibility of the 19 rulemaking and the associated analysis which 20 influences suggestions and preliminary 21 determinations in the framework. 22 I'll skip the part about NEMA is

### 202-234-4433 Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Page 70 1 the association of -- founded in. So, 2 specifically, the NEMA lamp section 3 represented here today by several North 4 American and globally based manufacturers 5 wishes to convey several points regarding our

6 concerns. 7 First, we are concerned over the 8 timing of the rulemaking in terms of the 9 effective dates of the previous rule. While we 10 recognize the Department is initiating this 11 rulemaking at this time to manage its time and 12 resources in order to meet its statutory 13 obligations under EPACT '92 for a Tier 2 14 rulemaking, beginning at this early date, 15 which is approximately two years after 16 completion of the Tier 1 rule, and almost a 17 year before the effective date of the Tier 1 18 rule, this comes at a cost to DOE that should 19 not be under-appreciated. 20 The cost which we ask you to 21 acknowledge now is that the quality of the 22 information used in developing the proposals

### 202-234-4433 Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Page 71 1 at this early stage is likely poor. We note 2 that EPACT '92, 46 USC 62.95(i)(3) and (4) 3 contemplate that the Tier 2 rulemaking would 4 be initiated no later than six months after 5 the effective date of the Tier 1 rule. 6 While these provisions do not 7 prevent DOE from initiating the process 8 earlier, as you have, it's certainly implicit 9 in the structure of the statute that Congress 10 saw wisdom in beginning the Tier 2 rule after 11 there was some experience with the Tier 1 12 standard in the marketplace that would 13 generate useful information for the Tier 2 14 decision making. 15 Consequently, NEMA cautions the DOE 16 against becoming too invested in early stage 17 analysis, and what are the early stage 18 determinations until the informational 19 landscape settles, and the marketplace has had 20 an opportunity to adjust to the Tier 1

21 standard. Some of our comments below further 22 illustrate our specific concerns.

### 202-234-4433 Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Page 72 1 Second, we're concerned about the 2 timing and content of the rule in terms of the 3 sourcing, price fluctuations, and uncertainty 4 surrounding rare earth elements; specifically, 5 yttrium, terbium, and europium. 6 Given the current situation with 7 rare earths and triphosphor availability 8 concerns, it seems premature and inappropriate 9 to start considering further efficiency 10 requirements for general service fluorescent 11 lamps, a product that is already one of the 12 most efficient light sources available. 13 Any rulemaking which further 14 increases the demand of rare earth elements 15 must also bear in mind emerging evidence of 16 consumer backlash due to rising lamp costs and 17 potential reduction of product options from 18 the manufacturers. We have noted rising prices 19 are already impacting energy efficiency 20 retrofit business by making the paybacks in 21 return on investment projections outside of 22 what end-users consider acceptable.

### 202-234-4433 Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Page 73 1 Third, to follow-up on the timing 2 of the beginning of the rulemaking, we object 3 to the initial analysis and its numerous 4 speculative assumptions and projections made 5 in terms of product demand, availability and 6 pricing which were then extrapolated to 7 determine the proposed efficacy levels, and 8 other determinations in the framework. 9 Manufacturers are still making 10 investments in equipment and determining what 11 products they will offer on July 14, 2012. 12 Many products in current manufacturers' 13 catalogues will no longer be available on that 14 date. It is irresponsible to speculate as to 15 which products will still be available, their 16 corresponding level of consumer demand, and at 17 what price they'll both be produced and sold 18 at, when instead we can simply wait and obtain 19 hard data instead of guessing. 20 Energy savings projections for this 21 rule stand to be considerably more accurate

22 when based on hard data rather than

### 202-234-4433 Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Page 74 1 projections based off years old data, which 2 itself was generated through analysis and 3 projection. 4 In regards to any rebuttal to the 5 effect that this framework is only a set of 6 suggestions, we refer to the observed practice 7 that positions stated in the framework are 8 less likely to be abandoned or greatly changed 9 over the course of a rulemaking. In that 10 sense, far too much of the final rule is 11 already written down, and we have some 12 disagreements with that. 13 Fourth, we disagree the 14 Manufacturer Impact Statements as given on the 15 grounds they do not adequately address the 16 cumulative effect of the numerous concurrent 17 rulemakings being carried out in addition to 18 this one. While cumulative regulatory burden 19 has been the subject of many political 20 speeches of late, it's overlooked and is a 21 particularly difficult problem in this 22 rulemaking, particularly for the smaller

### 202-234-4433 Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Page 75 1 manufacturers, as we already spoke about a 2 little bit during the testing there for 3 incandescents.

4 Small manufacturers are even harder 5 hit and should not have to bear an unfair 6 burden as a result of overly aggressive 7 policies. There's also the added burden of 8 significantly more testing and reporting of a 9 lot of small sales volume lamps which would 10 result from the proposed increase in 11 regulation. This, again, is much harder on 12 small manufacturers, especially if they have 13 to get the testing at a NVLAP source facility 14 and pay for those associated costs. 15 As I noted already, manufacturers 16 are a group still making capital and personnel 17 investments in this poor economy to meet the 18 demands of the previous rulemaking. There's 19 also internal competition for testing 20 facilities internal to the companies due to 21 the other products that are already being 22 designed, not to mention that most of our R&D

### 202-234-4433 Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Page 76 1 focus today is on LED and OLED. 2 Because fluorescent products are 3 considered to be conventional aging 4 technology, there isn't nearly as much 5 incentive to devote research and development 6 time and testing to those products. 7 And, lastly, in terms of 8 manufacturer impact, in regards to what 9 products are determined affected and listed as 10 the affected products in the framework, we 11 object to the cross-referencing from one 12 actor's statutory authority document to 13 another in generating a list of products 14 affected, and the extent of that effect. 15 Scope creep, if you will, is a concern. 16 Fifth, we object to the death by a 17 thousand cuts approach being employed and 18 sweeping up numerous small market share 19 products, as I already mentioned, in demanding 20 extensive attention and analysis for each of 21 these in order to gain the test data needed, 22 and to thus justify the energy savings needed

### 202-234-4433 Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Page 77 1 to justify a rulemaking. 2 In the framework document, as an 3 example, different product classes identified 4 in general service fluorescent lamp 5 projections represent the bulk of products 6 used in professional consumer sectors. It's 7 not practical to use the analysis of these 8 products for other fluorescent lamp types, 9 such as two-foot, three-foot, five-foot, or 10 circline. These are low volume niche products 11 and special applications that in so many cases 12 aren't designed specifically for efficiency, 13 but rather to satisfy consumer demand or a 14 niche application. 15 So, it seems that some of these 16 aggressive aggregations of projections that 17 are done either to provide sufficient data for 18 analysis or to provide more advantageous 19 numbers in terms of the energy savings, or 20 just to make up for a lack of data. In these 21 cases, we suggest that instead the situation, 22 as it stands, should identify, therefore, a

### 202-234-4433 Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Page 78 1 product which is not appropriate for 2 regulation owing to its limited effect. 3 And my last point, and I'll 4 summarize, sixth, we object to the undertaking 5 like so many regulatory undertakings of late 6 seems to be conducted with a proverbial no-end 7 in sight. While additional ruling or another 8 look might be mandated, there's an 9 overwhelming displayed attitude of we will 10 always conduct a detailed rulemaking. We will 11 always effect to the design and availability 12 of as many products as possible, while 13 recognizing and support energy efficiency. 14 Since I came into this job in June, 15 I've been asking throughout the various 16 product sectors has anybody ever heard of them 17 not having a rulemaking, deciding one is not 18 needed? I have yet to find any concrete 19 example of that. 20 We applaud the Secretary in getting 21 rid of the backlog in the rules, but that 22 doesn't mean we always we have to have a rule.

### 202-234-4433 Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Page 79 1 And we're arguing that in the case of several 2 of the products we don't think it's needed. 3 So, our suggestions are that, 4 number one, the DOE delay the beginning of the 5 rulemaking as long as legally permissible so 6 as to allow for the largest amount of usable 7 data to be gathered for the potentially 8 affected products. In the case of catalogue 9 and product availability, this is July 2012, 10 and in the case of sales, the end of 2012 at 11 the earliest. 12 Number two, we suggest a framework 13 document be entirely reworked to remove any 14 details which were arrived at or generated by 15 the above-mentioned poor quality data or the 16 analysis therefrom. 17 Number three, we suggest the scope 18 of the products affected be restricted to 19 those specified in the original EPACT of 1992. 20 And, four, when you do restart the 21 rulemaking and determining baseline product 22 family performance, as well as associated max

### 202-234-4433 Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Page 80 1 tech estimates, only products which are truly 2 represented be used for a given product class. 3 Those are my comments. Thank you. 4 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: Thank you. 5 Any additional comments here at the outset? 6 Steve Rosenstock. 7 MR. ROSENSTOCK: Steve Rosenstock, 8 Edison Electric Institute. Thank you for 9 allowing me the opportunity to speak. 10 I think it's important, especially 11 for this rulemaking, is to kind of see where 12 we are with the current rule, and relating to 13 some of my concerns with the way the framework 14 document -- some of the framework document. th 15 Looking at the July 14 , 2009 16 rulemaking, that was a significant rule for 17 both general service fluorescent lamps and 18 incandescent reflector lamps. For both 19 products, there were five trial standard 20 levels in the Federal Register Notice. DOE 21 chose Trial Standard Level 4. Trial Standard 22 Level 5 was max tech. Okay? So, DOE went

### 202-234-4433 Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Page 81 1 almost as high as it possibly could, 2 basically, with the last rulemaking in 2009, 3 which goes into effect next summer. 4 Some of the quotes I thought were 5 very interesting, especially because it's 6 obviously residential and commercial product, 7 and a lot of the savings, especially, are 8 probably more likely geared -- going to be in 9 the commercial sector rather than residential 10 sector. But kind of speaking as a consumer, as 11 well as Edison Electric Institute, some of the 12 things kind of jump out, especially when 13 you're thinking about the residential market. 14 DOE expects under the standards 15 presented in the final rule the purchase price 16 of high efficacy GSFL would be higher, up to 17 13 times higher, including the purchase of new 18 lamps and a new ballast. And thinking about 19 the residential sector, someone who has T12 20 lamps or T12 fixture that's been there 10, 15, 21 20 years, they can't replace that T12 lamp any 22 more starting in July of 2012.

### 202-234-4433 Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Page 82 1 That consumer is going to go to a 2 hardware store, he's going to find the T12 3 lamp, maybe they'll try a T8 lamp, it won't 4 work because the ballast won't be compatible. 5 Then they'll realize they have to replace the 6 whole fixture. And yes, over the life of that 7 fixture, maybe over 10, or 15, or 20, or even 8 30 years it will pay for itself, but there 9 might be some very unhappy residential 10 consumers. Commercial, obviously, a lot of 11 them have been making changes already. 12 On the incandescent reflector side, 13 it says, "DOE expects a purchase price of 14 higher efficacy IRL to be 47 to 64 percent 15 higher than the average price of these 16 products today." Obviously, there's going to 17 be good paybacks in the commercial sector, but 18 in the residential sector there could be 19 significantly long periods of payback to 20 customers 10 or 20 years. 21 Also, in that same notice, the 22 Department of Justice said, "With respect to

### 202-234-4433 Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Page 83 1 IRLs, the Department is concerned that 2 proposed Trial Standard Level 4 could 3 adversely affect competition." The Department 4 of Justice concerns were pretty much noted by 5 DOE, but then pretty much kind of said well, 6 we think there will be competition. 7 So, I think the last rulemaking was 8 a significant game changer for these products, 9 especially in the residential sector. There 10 could be some very interesting consumer 11 reaction next summer when they see some of 12 these price increases, because obviously the 13 residential sector is very, very focused on 14 initial prices. 15 I know DOE, to its credit, looks at 16 life cycle costs but, again, when you're 17 talking these significant price increases, it 18 will have an impact on the market, in my view. 19 Taking a look at the framework 20 document, I did -- when looking through all 21 the numbers, some of the numbers went up -- 22 medium bi-pin went up from 75 to 89 lumens

### 202-234-4433 Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Page 84 1 per watt, eight-foot slimline went from 80 to 2 97 lumens per watt, et cetera. And then I 3 looked at some of the proposed efficacy levels 4 in Table 6.5 and 6.6, and I'm seeing numbers5 like 89 to 93 lumens per watt for the four6 foot medium bi-pin, but the baseline lamp is 7 92.3 lumens per watt, so you're really 8 thinking about maybe 92.3 to 93. For the 9 eight-foot slimline, 97 to 98. 10 I mean, the gains are very modest 11 that we are looking at in the framework 12 document. Another thing that's missing in 13 here are any of these max tech from 2009? I 14 couldn't find it. But if it is, think about 15 it. If these numbers are max tech, there's 16 not much difference between the floor and the 17 ceiling for all these technologies because of 18 the last rulemaking when you get right down to 19 it. 20 So, I think a concern is, and it's 21 not shown in here, is basically are these max 22 tech, or is there a little bit more head room

### 202-234-4433 Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Page 85 1 with some of these products? If there is, 2 great. If not, then you might have to think 3 about what -- is there really enough 4 justification for this? 5 So, I understand the need, and I 6 understand the mandates, and I appreciate the 7 -- I also appreciate DOE having a framework, 8 by the way, because I know under the new 9 procedures sometimes DOE can skip the 10 framework and go right to the preliminary 11 analysis. So, I do want to say I really 12 appreciate having the framework because I 13 think it can help with DOE in their 14 preliminary analysis, especially with some of 15 the timing of some of these other technical 16 standards. But I think it's really -- and 17 it's not shown in the framework. I think it 18 really kind of -- it's kind of missing in 19 terms of the big leap that was done by the 20 last rulemaking in potentially looking at max 21 tech as a new efficiency level here. And I 22 think if these are max tech, I think it should

### 202-234-4433 Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Page 86 1 be noted in future analysis and future 2 publication, because that is very, very 3 significant. 4 Thank you very much for your time. 5 Appreciate it. 6 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: Thank you. 7 Additional comments here before we get into

8 the content? Joanna? 9 MS. MAUER: Joanna Mauer. Just in 10 terms of timing. We, of course, support DOE 11 using the most recent data available for 12 developing the rule, but DOE rulemaking 13 typically takes about three years from start 14 to finish. And given the deadline for the 15 final rule, I think it's about two and a half 16 years out from now, so I think it's certainly 17 appropriate for DOE to initiate the rule at 18 this point given the volume of analysis that

19 has to be conducted between now and then. 20 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: Okay. Thank 21 you. Additional comments? Just as we were 22 going to break we received a comment from

### 202-234-4433 Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Page 87 1 someone on line. This is from Lindsay Steel, 2 and she writes -- I think this is a question. 3 "A minimum of seven months at two times lamps 4 does not equal required minimum sample size of 5 20 lamps?" 6 MS. GUPTA: Yes. This is Mimi 7 Gupta. So, I think that question refers to 8 the test procedure minimum sample requirements 9 for lifetime. And just as a clarification, I 10 think the proposal was to say a minimum of two 11 samples for at least seven months, and then 12 the remaining sample to fill in the rest of

13 the 20 could be chosen at the manufacturer's 14 discretion. 15 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: Okay. So, 16 then now we're moving on to the Standards side 17 of today's work. And let's hear from 18 Aisha. 19 Ms. HUSAIN: Hi, my name is Aisha 20 Husain, I'm with Navigant. And I'll be 21 presenting the GSFL-IRL framework document. 22 So, the purpose of the framework

### 202-234-4433 Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Page 88 1 document is to present how DOE plans to 2 determine energy conservation standards, and 3 we will be going through the methodology DOE 4 is planning to use for each analysis of the 5 rulemaking. We will first start with a brief 6 background, including the regulatory history 7 and the scope of coverage. 8 This slide presents the regulatory 9 history of GSFL and IRL standards. The Energy 10 Policy and Conservation Act of 1992 amended 11 EPCA establishing energy conservation 12 standards for certain classes of GSFLs and 13 IRLs, and authorized DOE to conduct two 14 rulemaking cycles to determine whether these 15 standards should be amended, and to adopt 16 standards for additional GSFLs, if warranted.

17 EISA 2007 made amendments that 18 impacted covered IRLs, it expanded the 19 definition of IRLs to include lamps with a 20 diameter between 2.25 and 2.75 inches. It 21 also expanded the definition to elliptical 22 reflector or ER, bulged reflector or BR,

### 202-234-4433 Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Page 89 1 parabolic reflector or PAR, or bulged 2 parabolic aluminized reflector, or similar 3 bulb shapes. It set standards for these lamps 4 but exempted certain other IRLs, which we will 5 discuss in more detail a little later. 6 In 2009, DOE published a final rule 7 that was the first revision of standards for 8 GSFLs and IRLs. We will refer to this as the 9 2009 Lamps Rule throughout the presentation. 10 This rulemaking constitutes the 11 second review of GSFL and IRL standards. It 12 will also determine whether standards should 13 be set for additional GSFL lamp types that are 14 not already covered. 15 So, the framework document was 16 published in September. DOE plans to publish 17 the preliminary analysis TSD by September 18 2012, plans to publish the NOPR by August 19 2013, final rule by April 2014, and any

20 amended standards would take effect three 21 years after the final rule is published, which 22 would be estimated at April 2017. DOE will

### 202-234-4433 Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Page 90 1 hold public meetings to receive comments at 2 the preliminary and the NOPR stages. 3 This table shows the seven factors 4 EPCA directs DOE to consider when setting 5 energy conservation standards. It also shows 6 the corresponding analysis that address each 7 factor. We will be discussing these in more 8 detail throughout the presentation. 9 So, the next two slides are just a 10 review of the GSFL and IRL standards that will 11 go into effect in 2012. These were set by the 12 2009 Lamps Rule. So, here we have the GSFL 13 standards, which are in lumens per watt, vary 14 by lamp type and correlated color temperature, 15 or CCT, which is in degrees Kelvin. Standards 16 are kept constant across wattages. DOE 17 projects that these standards will be 18 achieved with more efficacious T8 lamps; in 19 particular, the use of improved 800 series 20 rare earth phosphor technology.

21 These are the standards for the 22 2012 standards for IRLs. They are based on a

### 202-234-4433 Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Page 91 1 power law equation in which the efficacy 2 varies by the rated wattage of the lamp, which 3 is denoted by P here. DOE projects these 4 standards can be met by improved halogen, 5 infrared, or HIR lamps that use improved 6 reflector coatings, improved HIR coatings, and 7 improved capsule designs. 8 So, now I'll move on into the scope 9 of coverage. For GSFLs, DOE defines general 10 service fluorescent lamp as any fluorescent 11 lamp that can satisfy the majority of 12 fluorescent lighting applications. Currently, 13 energy conservation standards cover the types 14 of GSFLs shown under this first bullet. 15 In addition to reviewing and 16 amending standards for the six fluorescent 17 lamp types listed here, this rulemaking will 18 consider expanding coverage to additional lamp 19 types. DOE will determine if additional lamp 20 types should be covered based on whether the 21 standards will result in energy savings. And, 22 also, whether they would be technologically

### 202-234-4433 Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Page 92 1 feasible, and economically justified. 2 At this stage of the rulemaking, 3 DOE is considering looking at possible 4 additions as pin-based compact fluorescent 5 lamps. Based on some preliminary research, we 6 believe that the percentage of shipments for 7 pin-based GFLs compared to currently covered 8 GSFLs is approximately 11 percent. Some of 9 the other additional lamp types that we are 10 looking at are nonlinear fluorescent lamps, 11 such as circline lamp types, and also lamps of 12 non-standard lengths, two, three, five foot 13 that are not currently covered. 14 IRLs currently covered by standards 15 are lamps that have ER, BR, PAR, BPAR, or 16 similar bulb shapes with medium screw bases. 17 They would have a rated voltage between 115 18 and 130 volts, a diameter that exceeds 2.25 19 inches, rated wattage that is 40 watts or 20 higher, and they are not colored or intended 21 for rough or vibration service applications. 22 As mentioned previously, EISA 2007

### 202-234-4433 Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Page 93 1 exempted certain incandescent reflector lamps 2 which are listed under the second bullet. 3 Therefore, standards for these lamps were not 4 described as a part of the 2009 Lamps Rule. 5 However, subsequently, DOE determined that 6 these lamps were exempted from standards 7 specified in the ESA 2007 but not from future 8 regulations. DOE, therefore, has initiated a 9 new rulemaking to set standards for these 10 lamps specifically. 11 The framework document for this 12 rulemaking was published April 2010, and a 13 public meeting was held May 2010. So, since a 14 separate rulemaking is in process for them, 15 this rulemaking will not be covering these 16 particular lamps.

17 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: Steve

18 Rosenstock. 19 MR. ROSENSTOCK: Steve Rosenstock, 20 EEI. I've said this with other products. And, 21 again, it would be up to the manufacturers. 22 If these can be considered competitive

### 202-234-4433 Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Page 94 1 products, you know, reflector lamps that serve 2 certain purposes, it might be advisable, if 3 possible, to in the future at least try to do 4 all these rulemakings at the same time. They 5 affect the same manufacturers, the same 6 stakeholders. And if there's a way to combine 7 all these rulemakings in the future, I think 8 it would be one way to streamline it, because 9 it could be considered competitive products so 10 that, again, depending on the timing of the 11 actual standard, if some have significantly 12 lower standards than the other products, and 13 their could be price points, it might make 14 sense, again, in the same competitive market 15 to try to do the standards for all these 16 products at the same time at some point in the 17 future. Thank you. 18 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: Tim Ballo. 19 MR. BALLO: Tim Ballo with Earth 20 Justice. I was also wondering if the 21 Department could give any hint as to whether 22 it's thinking about merging the exempted IRL

### 202-234-4433 Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Page 95 1 rulemaking with this rulemaking going down the 2 road, or you still intend to proceed with that 3 as a separate rulemaking all through the 4 process? 5 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: Betsy. 6 MS. KOHL: Betsy Kohl, DOE GC. 7 We're still considering it as a separate 8 rulemaking. 9 MS. ANDERSON: Just pull the 10 microphone towards you. 11 MR. BALLO: I also had another lamp 12 to discuss, the medium base compact 13 fluorescent lamp had standards set under EPACT 14 in 2005. I think our position is that it's 15 actually due now for the six-year review that 16 was enacted under EISA. In either case, even 17 under a more -- under a different 18 interpretation of EISA, it wouldn't be due for 19 that six-year review for a couple of years 20 yet, but I think it makes sense to probably 21 look at those lamps also in this rulemaking. 22 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: Keith, and

### 202-234-4433 Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Page 96 1 then Alex. 2 MR. COOKE: On the general service 3 fluorescent lamps, in light of the rare earth 4 phosphor situation, we don't recommend 5 extending the coverage beyond what's already 6 covered. It will only exacerbate the problem 7 we have with rare earth phosphor. And, 8 furthermore, the volume of those products is 9 very small, so the energy savings that could 10 be obtained are also very small.

11 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: Alex. 12 MR. BOESENBERG: Alex Boesenberg, 13 NEMA. I have two points. 14 First, regarding incandescent 15 lamps, obviously, driving them to higher 16 efficiency for those that are already 17 redesigned with halogen capsules, the obvious 18 implication is that these lamps are redesigned 19 with the halogen capsules. I'm currently 20 engaged in replying to a different rulemaking 21 about the infeasibility of at least one 22 product type that we simply cannot make it

### 202-234-4433 Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Page 97 1 with a halogen capsule due to its size. 2 When you put a halogen capsule in a 3 formerly standard filament incandescent lamp 4 you have to -- there are two primary 5 considerations. One is that the distance 6 between the capsule inside and the glass 7 envelope outside be sufficient regarding 8 Underwriters Laboratories safety standards for

9 the heat of that surface. And the other 10 consideration for reflector lamps, in 11 particular, is that the position of the 12 capsule and the design of the reflector be 13 sufficient to give it the right light 14 characteristics so that it is a one-for-one 15 replacement for an incandescent filament lamp. 16 This is not always possible, and it's a 17 sticking point. If we can't make it, we can't 18 make it. 19 So, I'll leave that there. And to 20 amplify Mr. Cooke's comment on tubular 21 fluorescent lamps, and to drive home again the 22 rare earth element issue, there are several

### 202-234-4433 Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Page 98 1 factors at play, one of which is that China 2 for sake of what they have called a 3 humanitarian and safety improvements have 4 closed these mines. They could have closed 5 the coal mine, but they didn't. Speculation 6 on these products began some years ago, and 7 the prices have gone up not by multiples, but 8 by orders of magnitude. Further increase on 9 that demand strains an already overburdened

10 demand. 11 Furthermore, due to the current 12 trade relations, it's fairly easy to get -- 13 comparatively speaking, you can get rare 14 earths much more easily if you're located in 15 the country that's producing them. If you're 16 not, you're paying that 4,500 percent increase 17 for that product. And to cut it short, we're 18 talking jobs, because we can make linear 19 fluorescent somewhere else, but right now we 20 like to make them in the U.S., and we want to 21 continue to be able to do so. 22 So, as I said in my prior remarks,

### 202-234-4433 Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Page 99 1 these are niche applications, and while yes, 2 you could try to ramp their efficiency up so 3 you can get your overall percentage savings 4 you're going for, in the end if on the 5 individual family basis they really don't save 6 that much, we would argue that there's not a 7 cost benefit to redesign and further 8 exacerbating demand on the product, the raw 9 materials, I mean. 10 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: Okay. Pekka? 11 DR. HAKKARAINEN: Pekka Hakkarainen, 12 Lutron. I'm going back to Slide 33, which 13 shows the rulemaking time line, and I'm just 14 going to note that in my opinion, the 15 September 2012 date for the technical support 16 document is way too early. We will not have 17 had -- I'm sort of stating what Alex said 18 earlier in the preliminary comments, we will 19 not have had any experience with the new rule 20 that comes into effect in July really worth 21 noting by that time. And I'm concerned that 22 based on historical evidence that when

### 202-234-4433 Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Page 100 1 technical support documents are published, 2 that they tend not to change after that. 3 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: Thank you. 4 So, we've got a good start on it here. Mike, 5 please. 6 MR. McGARAGHAN: Mike McGaraghan, 7 Energy Solutions. I have a comment that 8 probably will come out in various forms 9 throughout the day, but right now it's just -- 10 it's kind of a response to some of the 11 introduction comments that have been made, and

12 some of the comments about rare earth 13 phosphors, and the current shortage. 14 In general, I certainly agree that 15 it's a dire situation for rare earths at the

16 moment. And I also understand that the last 17 lamp rule was a significant step forward, and 18 that this is pretty close on the heels of that 19 one. I think the only counterpoint I want to 20 make is just we're talking about standards 21 that will likely not take effect until 2017 or 22 2018, which is seven years from now, and a lot

### 202-234-4433 Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Page 101 1 can change in seven years. And DOE has a 2 pretty clear set of instructions on how to 3 proceed with these rulemakings. And at this 4 stage, I think those clear instructions are to 5 identify maximum technologically feasible, and 6 then go from there. So to be at this point in7 2011 already talking about what's cost8 effective, and what standard or what 9 technology should be screened out, it's way 10 too early for that. And I think that was 11 actually a flaw of the last rulemaking for the 12 last lamp rule, was that some technologies got 13 screened out before they should have. 14 It may turn out in the end that for15 some of these technologies, they're not cost16 effective, but I'm missing the four points 17 right now that DOE is supposed to use to 18 screen out technologies at this stage. I think 19 it's feasibility to manufacture or install -- 20 help me out, Mimi. 21 MS. GUPTA: Safety. 22 MR. McGARAGHAN: Safety and health.

### 202-234-4433 Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Page 102 1 MS. GUPTA: Utility. Yes, they'll 2 be going over them. 3 MR. McGARAGHAN: Yes, we'll get 4 there, but to start talking about screening 5 something out right now because a material 6 that may be needed to produce them is 7 extremely expensive, that's just premature. 8 So, encouraging DOE to proceed with the 9 rulemaking, I think I agree with NEMA that 10 September 2012 date for the TSD may be a 11 little premature, but the overall process here 12 that's going to take four years to get through 13 a rulemaking, or three and a half years to get 14 through a rulemaking still needs to plow 15 forward and be pretty forward thinking in 16 terms of trying to capture an appropriate

17 standard level for 2017 or 2018. 18 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: Okay. Keith.

19 MR. COOKE: I understand the 20 comments, but at the same time the DOE also 21 has very strict rules on trying to make 22 changes after these rulemakings are already in

### 202-234-4433 Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Page 103 1 place. And that's got us into the problem 2 we're facing right now, and the fact that in 3 light of the availability of rare earth 4 materials may actually end up shutting our 5 plants down. And due to the anti-backsliding 6 rules, the DOE has their hands tied on what 7 they can do. So, we need to be very, very 8 careful going forward. This is very dangerous 9 to our energy savings.

10 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: Alex. 11 MR. BOESENBERG: Alex Boesenberg, 12 NEMA. One minor rebuttal and then an 13 amplifying point to Keith's statement. 14 My math, April 2017 is only five 15 and a half years away. It's a lot closer than 16 it sounds on paper. And one thing I didn't 17 mention is that NEMA is preparing a detailed 18 analysis of the industry situation and 19 position on rare earths. And when that's 20 ready, when we have all the data that we are 21 responsibly gathering to illustrate our 22 concerns, that will be made very public. And

### 202-234-4433 Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Page 104 1 I will be sure to include that with our 2 comments on this rulemaking. I expect it to be 3 done within the next few weeks. It drives the 4 point home, we are starting to have trouble 5 making products today with the existing rule, 6 not just the coming up one. We're already 7 having trouble. 8 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: Okay. We 9 have a comment or a question, in fact, from 10 someone joining us on line. This is from 11 David Liss. He asks, "Do medium screw base 12 CFLs fall under the GSFL scope?"

13 MS. GUPTA: No. 14 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: No? DOE says 15 no. Okay, thank you. Joanna. 16 MS. MAUER: Joanna Mauer. I was just 17 wondering, first, if DOE could say anything 18 about the schedule for the exempt IRL 19 rulemaking. I think we had expected to see a 20 proposed rule by now. 21 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: Betsy. 22 MS. KOHL: This is Betsy Kohl.

### 202-234-4433 Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Page 105 1 We're still working on that, but when it gets 2 to the Register, you'll see it. 3 MS. MAUER: Okay, thank you. And I 4 think our preference going forward would be to 5 not have the situation where the standards for 6 certain types of reflector lamps may always be 7 more stringent than the standards for other 8 types of reflector lamps. So, we would like 9 to see standards for these currently exempt 10 reflector lamps be set as soon as possible to 11 eliminate the current loophole in the market. 12 But we'd like to avoid then having potentially 13 the standards for the IRLs that are currently 14 covered be raised while these other ones may 15 not be. So, ideally, we'd like standards to 16 be set for the exempt IRLs as soon as 17 possible, but then also be incorporated in 18 this current rulemaking. And the baseline for 19 those may or may not be different, but that 20 way going forward they'll all be on the same 21 track, and we won't have this issue.

22 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: Pekka.

### 202-234-4433 Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Page 106 1 DR. HAKKARAINEN: Pekka Hakkarainen, 2 Lutron. It's my understanding that we are not 3 here to talk about the ER BR rulemaking today, 4 so we are certainly not prepared to respond in 5 any way. 6 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: Okay. So, 7 shall we proceed? No additional comments at 8 this point? Mike, for comment.

9 MR. McGARAGHAN: Just another 10 follow-on in terms of the specifics of the 11 product class and the additional products. I 12 think 11 percent is what you quoted as the 13 market share, or the percent of fluorescent 14 lamps that are in base CFLs. That sounds like 15 a fairly significant amount to me. It doesn't 16 sound like just a low volume niche product. 17 And, also, just from doing a lot of 18 lighting audits and building walk throughs, 19 two-foot lamps and three-foot lamps are not 20 especially rare. I can't remember doing a 21 lighting audit in an office building that 22 didn't have a lot of two-foot lamps in it, so

### 202-234-4433 Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Page 107 1 in general I think we'd like to see how the 2 numbers pencil out, but are supportive of DOE 3 looking into additional products. 4 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: Okay. Mimi? 5 MS. GUPTA: Yes, Mimi Gupta. I 6 guess I would just ask NEMA if they have any 7 market information that would support the low 8 market share, or what the market share is for 9 these products. DOE would definitely 10 appreciate that.

11 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: Susan?

12 MS. ANDERSON: We have that. 13 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: Okay. Great. 14 So, let's proceed. 15 MS. HUSAIN: Okay. So, as we've 16 mentioned earlier that -- 17 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: A little bit

18 louder. 19 MS. HUSAIN: Sure. As we mentioned 20 earlier, in this rulemaking DOE will also be 21 reevaluating the metric for measuring IRL 22 efficacy. Currently, this metric is based on

### 202-234-4433 Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Page 108 1 lumen output per watt. 2 In the 2009 Lamps Rule, NEMA had 3 commented that a better method for measuring 4 IRL efficacy was needed, and referred to 5 application efficacy as a possibility. So, in 6 this rulemaking DOE is considering using 7 application efficacy metric for IRLs. 8 Application efficacy is a type of 9 directional lumens per watt, as has been 10 mentioned. It is based on the idea that the 11 effectiveness of the lamp or luminary should 12 be quantified in terms of the lamp delivering 13 light to locations where it is needed. It is 14 generally measured in terms of luminous flux 15 within a specific area or solid angle per unit 16 power. So, in developing this metric for IRLs 17 we would need to define the areas to be 18 lighted depending on specific applications or 19 relevant solid angles. 20 We would like your comments 21 regarding pursuing application efficacy as a 22 metric for IRLs specifically in terms of

### 202-234-4433 Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Page 109 1 defining the areas for various types of 2 reflectors, and on test procedures that would 3 be specific to this metric. 4 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: Keith? 5 MR. COOKE: Keith Cooke, Philips. 6 Because of the directionality and sensitivity 7 to the center beam candlepower intensity, beam 8 angle and field angle characteristics, a great 9 deal of care needs to go into the development 10 of a new metric that involves energy 11 efficiency and human factors needs. And we've 12 talked about this before. 13 We believe it would be appropriate 14 for this rulemaking to be conducted for the 15 sole purpose of determining the metric that 16 would replace lumens per watt for the 17 incandescent reflector lamps. But right now, 18 we cannot support an additional increase of 19 the existing lumens per watt standard to the 20 incandescent reflector lamps beyond where it's 21 already been set for July of next year. 22 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: Okay. Steve

### 202-234-4433 Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Page 110 1 Rosenstock. 2 MR. ROSENSTOCK: Steve Rosenstock, 3 EEI. Looking at this new proposed metric, I 4 think it's I'll say a more sophisticated type 5 of metric to describe especially the IRL 6 technology. The issue is -- and, again, just 7 speaking as a pure amateur, so please forgive 8 me now. How many different solid angles would 9 you have to have for the BPARs, PARs, ER, et 10 cetera, et cetera, et cetera. And then would 11 you need to adjust for the beam angle? There 12 are so many things that you could do to make 13 it more sophisticated, but then again how many 14 different categories would you have? And then 15 it's like well, why not concentrate on the 16 other things, like the beam angle or the field 17 angle, or the center beam candlepower? 18 So, I understand making it more 19 sophisticated to make it a more useful metric. 20 It just -- there could be a timing issue, and 21 I think it's a matter of making sure that the 22 industry is okay with it. And then also,

### 202-234-4433 Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Page 111 1 there would be the education campaign for the 2 end use consumer because a lot of people don't 3 even know what a lumen is, so the term what a 4 candela is -- I mean, it might need a lot of 5 the -- especially for the residential class 6 might need a lot of education there. But I 7 understand what you're trying to do. Thank 8 you. 9 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: Thank you. 10 Keith. 11 MR. COOKE: I'm trying to think of 12 how to word this. What we're believing right 13 now is with the last rulemaking the standard 14 was already set at about the max. So, the 15 timing is still very apropos for us to go 16 ahead and work on the new metric, because we 17 don't, first off, support increasing the 18 metric where it's at, so we believe it should 19 it should stay where it's at. 20 In the meantime, what's happening 21 in the industry or out with the consumers is 22 there is confusion because the solid state

### 202-234-4433 Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Page 112 1 lighting replacements for the incandescent 2 reflector lamps are significantly different. 3 So, if you get a 25 degree beam angle in an 4 incandescent reflector lamp, what we're 5 finding is people will prefer a 35 degree 6 solid state light lamp to replace it. And the 7 reason is, is because with the solid state 8 lighting you have such a sharp cutoff, you can 9 do so well on controlling that light that you 10 don't have the blurring that you have with the 11 conventional incandescent reflectors, which 12 gave you actually larger angles than what was

13 stated. 14 So, it's time for us to come up with a new 15 metric in light of the changing technology

16 that's out there. 17 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: Okay. So, 18 let's proceed. Oh, one more comment? Yes, 19 Mike. 20 MR. McGARAGHAN: A question for 21 Keith. Can you expand a little bit on how the 22 new metric will help address that, the --

### 202-234-4433 Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Page 113 1 MR. COOKE: We don't know.

2 MR. McGARAGHAN: Oh. 3 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: But you all 4 said you're working on it. Right? You started 5 working on it? 6 MR. COOKE: This is something that 7 NEMA has been discussing just recently, and we 8 have started throwing out some suggestions, 9 but it's very early, very, very early.

10 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: Good. Alex. 11 MR. BOESENBERG: Alex Boesenberg, 12 NEMA. To amplify on Keith's statement. The 13 phrasing of Keith's statement I hope is not

14 lost on folks that the reason we need a new 15 metric is not for incandescent reflector 16 lamps. It's so that we can better characterize 17 the new fast belle of the ball solid state 18 everybody wants to dance with. 19 The fact that if we write it very 20 well so that it can apply to other 21 technologies and it's technology neutral, and 22 it is widely applicable, that's great, but

### 202-234-4433 Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Page 114 1 that illustrates my point of all the R&D, all 2 the money, all the attention is on the new 3 products. And that's where, when we have 4 limited resources and time, that's where need 5 to focus. So, that illustrates my point. 6 Thank you. 7 MR. COOKE: Okay. Mimi? 8 MS. GUPTA: Mimi Gupta. So, Keith, 9 is there some sort of time line that's been 10 established for when the new metric that you 11 guys are working on plans on being completed? 12 MR. COOKE: I haven't heard anything 13 myself. 14 MS. GUPTA: Okay. 15 MR. BOESENBERG: Alex Boesenberg. 16 The Lighting Systems Division of NEMA is 17 meeting for their semi-annual powwows next 18 week. This will be one of the topics. We'll 19 at least have some sort of idea at least on 20 what kind of resources we're going to devote 21 to it, and what our end goal will be next 22 week, end of the week. But telling you

### 202-234-4433 Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Page 115 1 exactly when it will be ready, that's a very 2 different question. 3 MR. COOKE: Yes. We just had the 4 Lamp Section Technical Committee meeting last 5 week, and this was taken up as a new task that 6 we were going to undertake. And we started to 7 form the team at that meeting. So, like I 8 said, it's very early right now. The team 9 hasn't met yet. They have got a charter, 10 essentially, as to what they need to get 11 accomplished, but that's about as far as it is 12 right now. 13 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: Thanks, 14 Keith. Susan. 15 MS. ANDERSON: And the other thing 16 is is that NEMA planned to work with the DOE 17 on this, to partner on setting this new 18 metric. So, we would want you in the loop, 19 and come to a mutual decision. 20 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: Mimi. 21 MS. GUPTA: Yes. It reminds me of 22 what happened with the ballast efficiency

### 202-234-4433 Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Page 116 1 metric that I think it was very helpful for 2 the DOE to be involved, and understand the 3 progress of that metric, and facilitate the 4 adoption of it in the oncoming final rule. 5 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: Okay, thank 6 you. Okay. Now, let's proceed. 7 MS. HUSAIN: Okay. So, now we will 8 be moving on to the first analyses of the 9 standards making process, the market and 10 technology assessment, and the screening 11 analysis. 12 The purpose of the market and 13 technology assessment is to determine product 14 classes and identify technology options to 15 improve lamp efficacy. To do this, DOE will 16 characterize the GSFL and IRL market. 17 For the screening analysis, DOE 18 will screen out technology options based on 19 four criteria. DOE will look at technological 20 feasibility; that is, whether the technology 21 is commercially available or in a working 22 prototype, practicability to manufacture,

### 202-234-4433 Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Page 117 1 install, and service, meaning it should be 2 possible to achieve mass production and 3 reliable installation and servicing. That it 4 doesn't have any adverse impacts on utility to 5 consumers or availability, and it doesn't have 6 any adverse impacts on health or safety. 7 The technology options that remain 8 after the screening analysis are called design 9 options. They are used in the engineering 10 analysis to identify baseline lamps or lamp 11 ballast systems, and higher efficacy options. 12 We will go into more detail about this in the 13 engineering analysis. 14 For the market and technology 15 assessment, DOE requests interested parties to 16 submit data on shipments, product feature and 17 efficiency trends, distribution channels, and 18 estimates of market shares for the lamps. 19 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: Keith? 20 MR. COOKE: NEMA biz can help 21 provide this information. 22 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: Okay, thank

### 202-234-4433 Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Page 118 1 you. 2 MS. HUSAIN: Okay, thanks. One of 3 the main results of the market and technology 4 assessment is the establishment of product 5 classes which are fed into the engineering 6 analysis. DOE divided covered product classes 7 by type of energy used, capacity of the 8 product, or any other performance-related 9 features that require different standard 10 levels, such as features affecting consumer 11 utility. DOE establishes separate energy 12 conservation standards for each product class. 13 So, for GSFLs because of their 14 impact on consumer utility, DOE is considering 15 the following characteristics when determining 16 product classes; physical constraints, the 17 lamp shape and length which provide a unique 18 utility and impact efficacy, lumen package or 19 quantity of light provided by lamp ballast 20 system because efficacy decreases as a system 21 is driven harder to increase light output, the 22 CCT or correlated color temperature which is

### 202-234-4433 Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Page 119 1 the measure of the perceived color of the 2 white light emitted from the lamp which 3 impacts efficacy and provides distinct 4 utility. 5 Based on these characteristics, DOE 6 is considering the 12 product classes shown in 7 this table on this slide. These are also the 8 same product classes established in the 2009 9 Lamps Rule. 10 In particular, in the 2009 Lamps 11 Rule, DOE had created a separate product class 12 for T5 lamps because physical constraints 13 prevent them from serving as direct 14 replacements for T8 and T12 lamps, and the 15 lamps are generally considered to be too 16 bright for use in direct lighting. DOE 17 welcomes comments on maintaining separate 18 product classes for T5 lamps.

19 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: Susan? 20 MS. ANDERSON: Well, NEMA absolutely 21 supports that. The bases are different, the 22 lamp holders are different, they're not

### 202-234-4433 Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Page 120 1 interchangeable products. And the actual 2 performance varies greatly, T5, to T8, to T12. 3 And when you look at T5 standard versus T5 4 high output the loading is very different. And 5 since T5 standard is actually a more efficient 6 lamp than T5HO. I think you can see that from 7 looking at all of our catalogues, so we 8 definitely support keeping T5 separate, and 9 there should be two categories of T5, the T5 10 standard, and the T5 high output. 11 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: Thank you. 12 MS. HUSAIN: Okay, thank you. We

13 also wanted to note here that -- 14 MS. GUPTA: Can I just ask one 15 question? 16 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: Mimi, go

17 ahead. 18 MS. GUPTA: So, are T5 standard 19 output lamps still considered generally 20 unsuitable for direct lighting applications? 21 I think at the -- during the last 2009 Lamps 22 rulemaking, a lot of them were marketed as --

### 202-234-4433 Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Page 121 1 MS. ANDERSON: They are typically 2 used in shielded fixtures. You'd use them 3 indirect or with a lens. And HO definitely 4 has to be shielded. You don't use those 5 direct unless you have very high -- 6 MS. GUPTA: But some standard output 7 T5 systems are used in some direct lighting 8 fixtures? 9 MS. ANDERSON: They're direct, but 10 they're always lensed. 11 MS. GUPTA: Okay, I see. 12 MS. ANDERSON: So, there is an 13 optical assembly that actually controls the 14 distribution.

15 MS. GUPTA: I see. 16 MR. COOKE: Usually a diffuser. 17 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: Yes. Okay. 18 Mike? 19 MR. McGARAGHAN: Mike McGaraghan, 20 California Utilities also support separate 21 product classes for T5s. And a follow-up 22 question on that, since they perform so

### 202-234-4433 Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Page 122 1 differently at different temperatures, do they 2 all test with the same temperature still in 3 the test procedure? And is that up for debate 4 in this test procedure rulemaking?

5 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: Susan? 6 MS. ANDERSON: Well, for T8 and T12, 7 those have always been tested at 25 degrees C, 8 which is about 77 degrees Fahrenheit. T5 were 9 actually designed to perform better at higher 10 temperatures, so the actual test procedure -- 11 I mean, for them we test them at 35 C, but 12 then we do a calculation to determine the 25 C 13 ratings. 14 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: Okay. 15 MR. McGARAGHAN: So, there is no 16 proposal to change that in the current test 17 procedure rulemaking, that method. Okay. 18 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: Industry 19 representatives are shaking their heads no. 20 Okay. Okay, so then let's proceed. 21 MS. HUSAIN: Okay. I just wanted to 22 note that if coverage is extended to

### 202-234-4433 Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Page 123 1 additional GSFL types, this product class 2 structure will need to be revised. 3 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: You've got to 4 speak a little -- 5 MS. HUSAIN: Sorry. So, I just 6 wanted to note that the product class 7 structure might be revised if there's 8 additional GSFL lamp types included. And also, 9 at this point, if there's any other comments 10 in general about the GSFL product classes.

11 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: Susan?

12 MS. ANDERSON: Yes. We would have 13 to look at that, because when you do look at 14 the shorter length lamps, they are inherently 15 less efficient, and circline is the same way. 16 And then pin-base compact fluorescent is a 17 totally different animal. So, we would have - 18 - if they were included, we would have to come 19 up with appropriate categories for them. 20 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: Okay. Okay. 21 MS. HUSAIN: Okay. So, for IRLs DOE 22 is planning to consider lamp spectrum,

### 202-234-4433 Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Page 124 1 diameter, and lamp voltage when determining



### 2 product classes similar to the 2009 Lamps



### 3 Rule.



### 4 The eight product classes DOE is



### 5 considering are shown in this table. We may



### 6 have to reconsider this product class



### 7 structure also based on a potentially new IRL



### 8 metric, and we would like -- welcome comments



### 9 on this issue, as well.



### 10 And then, in general, we'd like



### 11 comments on the product classes for



### 12 incandescent reflector lamps.



### 13 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: Keith?



### 14 MR. COOKE: Right now, NEMA feels



### 15 that the 2009 rule has already set a minimum



### 16 efficacy level sufficiently high to eliminate



### 17 all 130 volt products. And this will result



### 18 of loss of utility for users requiring the th 

### 19 higher voltage lamps after July 14 .



### 20 Therefore, we see no further need to maintain



### 21 the 130 volt product class.



### 22 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: So, then

### 202-234-4433 Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Page 125 1 everything above 125 is -- are you speaking on 2 behalf of NEMA, or --

3 MR. COOKE: Yes. 4 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: So, then -- 5 MS. ANDERSON: Yes, the last rule 6 already killed 130 volt lamps. 7 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: Okay. That 8 was Susan. Okay.

9 MS. KAARSBERG: That would be -- 10 MS. ANDERSON: So, when you look at 11 voltage, it would only be ones at 125 volts.

12 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: Yes. 13 MS. ANDERSON: You've already 14 eliminated greater than 125 volt lamps from 15 the marketplace.

16 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: If I'm 17 looking at the right chart, on 47 then that 18 would eliminate three, four, seven, and eight? 19 DR. HAKKARAINEN: No, no, one, two, 20 five, and six. 21 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: Okay, one, 22 two -- you're right. Right, right, one, two,

### 202-234-4433 Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Page 126 1 five and six. 2 MR. McGARAGHAN: So, Mike McGaraghan 3 from the California entities. I think we would 4 support also eliminating a distinction on 5 voltage, but I don't think you'd define it as 6 less than 125 volts. You could just remove any 7 reference all together. So, regardless of the 8 lamp's rated voltage, you would have a 9 standard that's set for it.

10 MR. BOESENBERG: We'd have to check. 11 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: Yes. Okay. 12 Thank you. 13 MS. HUSAIN: Okay. Now, we will move 14 on to discussing technology options that 15 improve efficacy. DOE is planning to examine 16 the technology options outlined in the above 17 slide for GSFL. The options cover technology 18 such as improved electrode coatings, fill gas 19 compositions, the use of higher efficiency 20 phosphors, and use of glass coatings. 21 In the 2009 Lamps Rule, DOE 22 screened out the multi-photon phosphor

### 202-234-4433 Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Page 127 1 technology. DOE is planning to screen out the 2 same technology in this rulemaking. 3 So, we've talked a lot about this 4 already, but I think I'll just go over this 5 slide pretty quickly and ask -- our main point 6 here is to ask for more comments on this 7 issue, the rare earth phosphor's availability 8 and pricing. 9 So, this is in context of the 10 higher efficiency phosphor technology option 11 for GSFLs. The higher efficiency phosphor 12 technology is based on improving lamp efficacy 13 by increasing phosphor UV absorption, 14 increasing phosphor radiation emission, or 15 increasing the thickness of the phosphor 16 layer. This technology utilizes rare earth 17 phosphors. In the 2009 Lamps Rule, DOE had 18 analyzed the rare earth phosphor market in 19 response to manufacturer concerns that GSFL 20 standards would drive up the rare earth 21 phosphor prices, and subsequently the cost of 22 lamps. And also concerns of whether there

### 202-234-4433 Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Page 128 1 were sufficient recoverable sources of these 2 phosphors. 3 DOE welcomes comments and/or any 4 information regarding this issue. In 5 particular, DOE would like to receive comments 6 on the composition of rare earth phosphors 7 being used in lamps, any estimates of 8 additional rare earth phosphors necessary to 9 go to higher standards, current or historical 10 prices of rare earth phosphors, and assessment 11 and future predictions on the relationship 12 between the lamp cost and prices of rare earth 13 phosphors. 14 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: Keith? 15 MR. COOKE: As Alex pointed out 16 earlier, NEMA is in the process of putting 17 together essentially a White Paper on that 18 very issue, and we expect that to be out next 19 week. So, we'll address almost that whole 20 list. 21 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: Okay, 22 excellent. That's very good. Steve?

### 202-234-4433 Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Page 129 1 MR. ROSENSTOCK: Steve Rosenstock, 2 EEI. We work with several national account 3 energy managers throughout the U.S., and one 4 of the email trails recently was about the 5 price of the T8 lamps. In fact, that end user 6 customers were seeing amounts of price 7 increases for either 2012 in the range of 8 anywhere from 25 to 70 percent. And those 9 percentages are significantly higher than any 10 projection probably shown, even dreamed about 11 by DOE when they were doing the rulemaking. 12 Again, who knows where the prices will go, but 13 it just -- obviously, that's a huge 14 significant increase, and could have 15 significantly actually affected the last rule 16 because there was no -- no one projected price 17 increases like that back in 2009 or 2008 when 18 the analysis was done. 19 So, again, just a point of 20 information. Again, it's all anecdotal, but I 21 can -- I'm happy to forward some of those 22 emails from the end user customers, but that's

### 202-234-4433 Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Page 130 1 what's happening this year. What will happen 2 in the next five years, who knows, but that's 3 what's happening now. Thank you.

4 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: Susan? 5 MS. ANDERSON: I can certainly say 6 to you that many of the utilities use the CEE 7 high performance T8 standard which was already 8 driving end users who were getting incentives 9 for energy efficient retrofits to use the 10 better products. In our particular family, it 11 would be the XP lamps, the XPS, depending on 12 whether it was full wattage or the super 13 saving version, so reduced wattage. And we 14 were getting calls from utility companies 15 because with the incentives that they had to 16 offer, their customers were no longer able to 17 justify energy efficient retrofits with what 18 had happened with the price of lamps. 19 I mean, the marketplace forced us 20 to raise the prices. And for my company, I 21 mean, we went back and relooked at optimizing 22 our phosphor coating and recently introduced a

### 202-234-4433 Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Page 131 1 new line of T8 lamps. And they currently meet 2 -- for the reduced wattage lamps, they meet 3 the CEE high performance, and meet the rules 4 for next year, that go into effect next year. 5 But they would not meet the proposed 6 regulations for the next; and, yet, this is 7 something that we've done to try to mitigate 8 the rare earth situation and what's happening 9 with the pricing there, so it's really -- I 10 mean, you want to move forward with these 11 energy efficient retrofits. I mean, that's our 12 greatest opportunity for energy savings in 13 this country. 14 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: Keith? 15 MR. COOKE: Also, just to make a 16 quick comment regarding the other technologies 17 that were listed. Right now, almost every 18 manufacturer is focusing on LEDs or OLEDs. 19 There is no R&D being put into these other 20 technologies, so if the DOE is betting that 21 one of these other technologies will be the 22 winner, we don't see it happening.

### 202-234-4433 Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Page 132 1 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: Okay. So, 2 additional comments? 3 MR. McGARAGHAN: Yes, one more 4 comment. I actually, if it's okay, wanted to 5 jump backwards. I misspoke on the voltage 6 issue, or I wanted to clarify. Our comment in 7 the last round was that the overwhelming 8 majority of line voltage is 120, and these 9 lamps are going to be used almost exclusively 10 at 120 volts, so it seemed irrelevant to have 11 a separate rating. And our comment was that 12 all lamps should just test at 120. So, a 13 minute ago when I said we could eliminate the 14 distinction and just have a product class that 15 applies to lamps regardless of voltage, that 16 was based on the assumption that all lamps 17 would be required to test at 120. If you 18 still do allow a rated lamp to test at 130, 19 then you would need that separate product

20 class and those standard levels to -- that 21 were enacted last time to continue, or else it 22 would become a big loophole, or it would be

### 202-234-4433 Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Page 133 1 backsliding, it would be a big section of 2 products that were no longer covered. 3 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: Okay. Keith?

4 MR. COOKE: Just to comment on that. 5 We need to recognize there are parts of this 6 country that do operate at 130 volts. And we 7 expressed that concern before, and it still 8 exists, that by operating these lamps at the 9 higher voltages that are not designed for that 10 does cause premature failure, and excessive 11 light output in some cases. 12 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: Okay. 13 MS. HUSAIN: So, now we'll move on

14 to --

15 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: We have one

16 more comment. Susan?

17 MS. ANDERSON: There's also been a 18 utility that's been removed. The 130 volt 19 lamps, the majority of them were actually used 20 by people with 120 volt operation but they 21 wanted longer lamp life. And by removing the 22 130 volt lamps as the 2009 rulemaking has

### 202-234-4433 Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Page 134 1 done, those folks no longer have that option. 2 Yet, when a 130 volt lamp is operated 120, it 3 actually operates at a reduced wattage, and 4 reduced light output so there was energy 5 savings. And now -- and it was good because 6 you got the longer lamp life, so you have less 7 waste. You go to sustainability, but that 8 utility has totally been eliminated.

9 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: Steve

10 Rosenstock. 11 MR. ROSENSTOCK: As a follow-up -- 12 Steve Rosenstock, EEI. When you do that 130 13 volt lamp at 120, that extends the life by a 14 factor of three almost, doesn't it, according 15 to some of the equations? 16 MS. ANDERSON: Standard incandescent 17 it's 2.7, with halogen it's approximately 18 twice.

19 MR. ROSENSTOCK: Thanks. 20 MS. CURRY: Ku'uipo Curry. Just one 21 question about low voltage lamps. I mean, I 22 know that -- I'm not sure if that's within the

### 202-234-4433 Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Page 135 1 scope of this but --

2 MS. ANDERSON: It's not. 3 MS. CURRY: It's not, okay.

4 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: Thanks. 5 Mike? 6 MR. McGARAGHAN: Low voltage lamps

7 are not -- 8 MS. ANDERSON: It is -- 9 MR. McGARAGHAN: With integrally 10 ballasted low voltage lamp would be covered by 11 this rulemaking, just to clarify. Is that 12 what you were -- 13 MS. ANDERSON: It is -- 14 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: Susan, go 15 ahead, clarify. 16 MS. ANDERSON: Well, I mean, if they 17 operate at line voltage they're covered. If 18 you're talking 12 volt, low voltage halogen, 19 that's not covered by this rulemaking. 20 MS. GUPTA: Yes, that's correct. 21 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: Mimi Gupta. 22 MS. GUPTA: The lamp needs to

### 202-234-4433 Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Page 136 1 operate between 115 and 130, but it can step 2 down the voltage to like run the filament at a 3 lower voltage, and then it would still be 4 covered. But the input into the lamp has be 5 between -- in that voltage range. 6 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: Line powered 7 as the input.

8 MS. GUPTA: Yes. 9 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: Yes, okay. 10 Okay, now we're going to move on. 11 MS. HUSAIN: All right. Now, we'll 12 be moving on to the IRL technology options. 13 DOE is planning to examine the technology 14 options shown on this slide. Some 15 technologies to note here are tungsten halogen 16 capsules, improved reflector coatings, 17 infrared coatings, and more efficacious 18 filament alloys. 19 In the 2009 Lamps Rule, DOE 20 screened out technologies colored in red in 21 this table. DOE is also planning to screen 22 out the same technologies in this rulemaking.

### 202-234-4433 Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Page 137 1 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: So, the red 2 ones, that's DOE's proposal to screen them

3 out. 4 MS. HUSAIN: Yes. So, at this time 5 DOE would like to invite comments on the GSFL 6 and IRL technology options, general comments 7 including any omissions and revisions.

8 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: No comments 9 on technology options? Okay. 10 MS. HUSAIN: Okay. So, the next part 11 is the engineering analysis, but -- 12 DR. HAKKARAINEN: Microphone. 13 MS. HUSAIN: Sorry. The next part 14 is the engineering analysis that was scheduled 15 for after the lunch break, but I can start 16 going into it. 17 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: How many 18 slides do you have in this segment? Let's go 19 to lunch. Okay. Several people have convinced

20 me. 21 MS. HUSAIN: Okay.

22

### 202-234-4433 Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Page 138 1 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: It's 11:30, 2 and we'll beat the lunch crowd if we do it 3 now. Does everybody know where they're going 4 here in the Forrestal Building? I think so. 5 Okay, just don't get lost and don't leave the 6 building. You might need an ID to get back in 7 from the cafeteria. The big cafeteria, you 8 walk down and go about 100 yards that way. 9 You've got to have your pink badge, and this 10 room will be locked, or there will be someone 11 in here so you can leave your stuff. 12 We've really covered a lot of 13 ground. We're making good progress here. 14 We're ahead of schedule, which is great. And 15 we'll come back at 12:30. Okay? 16 (Whereupon, the proceedings went 17 off the record at 11:33 a.m., and went back on 18 the record at 12:40 p.m.)

19

20

21 A-F-T-E-R-N-O-O-N S-E-S-S-I-O-N 22 12:40 p.m.

### 202-234-4433 Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Page 139 1 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: On the 2 record. Okay. So, welcome back. I think 3 we're just simply going to proceed with the 4 engineering analysis. 5 MS. HUSAIN: Sure. Sorry.

6 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: It froze 7 like that yesterday. 8 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: Oh, did it? 9 (Off the record comments.) 10 MS. HUSAIN: Okay. There we go. 11 All right. That's fine. No, it's okay. I'll 12 just do it from here. Thank you. 13 All right. So now we will be 14 moving on to the engineering analysis. The 15 engineering analysis and the product price 16 determination together are used to determine 17 the relationship between efficacy and end-user 18 price. The results of these analyses are also 19 used downstream for the life cycle cost or 20 LCC, the manufacturing impact analysis and the 21 national impact analysis. 22 This slide shows step-by-step the

### 202-234-4433 Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Page 140 1 general methodology DOE will be using for the 2 engineering analysis. The first step is to 3 choose representative product classes. 4 Within these representative product 5 classes, DOE identifies baseline models. 6 These are lamps DOE believes to be the most 7 common, least efficacious lamps in their 8 representative product class. 9 Then DOE will select the more 10 efficacious lamp ballast system based on 11 design options identified in the market and 12 technology assessments. DOE will develop 13 efficacy levels that range from the baseline 14 to maximum technologically feasible 15 efficacies. 16 Finally, DOE plans to scale these 17 results to the nonrepresentative product

18 classes. These are classes that are not 19 analyzed. So I will now go over in more 20 detail each of these steps. 21 As mentioned, DOE will not analyze 22 every product class. Instead it will choose

### 202-234-4433 Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Page 141 1 representative product classes. And these are 2 typically chosen based on the highest shipment

3 volume. 4 For GSFLs, DOE plans to consider as 5 representative lamps listed in this table, all 6 with a correlated color temperature less than 7 or equal to 4500 Kelvin. These are the same 8 representative product classes chosen in the 9 2009 Lamps Rule in which DOE generally 10 analyzed lamps with 4100 Kelvin CCT as these

11 were found to be the most common. 12 This table also shows the baseline 13 lamps DOE is considering. A baseline lamp as 14 I mentioned is what DOE believes to be the 15 most common, least efficacious lamp within 16 each representative product class. 17 The lamps -- 18 (Off the record comment.)

19 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: Yes. Go 20 ahead, Susan.

21 MS. ANDERSON: Yes. We have a 22 question. Why are there two eight foot RDC HO

### 202-234-4433 Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Page 142 1 categories? It's not even a very large lamp 2 family when you're NTAs.

3 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: Let's 4 capture this on the record. Tina, do you wish 5 to comment on this?

6 DR. KAARSBERG: No.

7 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: No. 8 Aisha, can you answer that comment? 9 Question? 10 MS. HUSAIN: Yes. I'm not quite 11 sure. That might have been a mistake. 12 MS. GUPTA: Yes. I think that's a 13 typo or a mistake. The intent is to only have 14 one representative lamp. 15 MS. ANDERSON: So then actually -- 16 MR. STEPHENS: I think the standard 17 is 92 for that category. So the 91.9 probably

18 wouldn't be the one.

19 MS. GUPTA: Yes. We can check on 20 that to verify. And we'll get back the -- 21 MS. HUSAIN: We'll correct it in 22 the presentation.

### 202-234-4433 Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Page 143 1 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: Pekka, do 2 you have a question? 3 DR. HAKKARAINEN: No, it was the 4 same question.

5 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: Same 6 question. Okay. 7 MS. HUSAIN: We can look into that 8 and we'll correct it on the presentation and 9 post it. 10 So the lamps with the 11 characteristics shown on this slide met the 12 standards adopted in the 2009 Lamps Rule. 13 Compliance with these standards are required 14 in 2012. Therefore, DOE believes these will 15 be the least efficacious and is planning to 16 consider them as baselines. 17 Also based on the assumption that 18 most commercially available T12 lamps will not 19 be able to meet the 2012 standards, DOE is 20 currently not analyzing T12 lamps as baselines 21 in this rulemaking and requests comments on 22 whether this is appropriate.

### 202-234-4433 Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Page 144 1 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: I want to 2 make sure your slides are matching up with our 3 slides because I think there is a slight 4 numbering disconnect. 5 MS. HUSAIN: This should be the 6 representative product classes and baselines,

7 GSFLs. 8 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: Yes. Okay. 9 (Off the record comment.) 10 Fifty-five on our sheets, but 60 on 11 yours. So I just -- I think we're in sync. I 12 think we're okay. 13 MS. HUSAIN: Yes. I think there 14 might be backup slides that are mixed in 15 there. That's why. 16 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: Okay. 17 Keith. 18 MR. COOKE: Yes. Keith Cooke, 19 Phillips. I think that what's missing on this 20 slide is the two foot U-shaped. If I look at 21 slide 45 on our ours, it showed what was the 22 classes being considered and that's the lamp

### 202-234-4433 Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Page 145 1 that's missing. 2 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: Yes. Okay. 3 Thank you.

4 Susan. 5 MS. ANDERSON: Well, actually in 6 the framework document, there's a scaling

7 factor for that. 8 MS. GUPTA: Right. 9 MS. ANDERSON: And I think it was 10 6.5 percent or 6.6 percent, something like

11 that.

12 MS. GUPTA: Yes. 13 MS. ANDERSON: So that's probably 14 why it's -- 15 MS. GUPTA: Yes. So this is Mimi 16 Gupta. The doubling of the eight foot high is 17 definitely not intentional and was a mistake. 18 But the absence of a two-foot U-shaped was not 19 a mistake. 20 Similar to the last rulemaking, DOE 21 is planning or proposing to scale the standard 22 for that product class and not analyze it

### 202-234-4433 Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Page 146 1 directly. But that's something that DOE is 2 open to comment on if the stakeholders feel 3 like the scaling approach is not warranted. 4 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: Keith. 5 MR. COOKE: Exactly right. I'm 6 very concerned with scaling a U-shape because 7 these are all linears that you'll do the 8 actual analysis on. And the efficiency of a 9 linear is inherently better than it is for any 10 shaped lamp because of trying to get the arc 11 started around the shapes and all those kinds 12 of things does take away from its efficiency. 13 MS. GUPTA: This is Mimi Gupta. So 14 in the previous rule we had applied a six to 15 seven percent -- I can't remember what the 16 reduction was to the four-foot medium bipin17 product class to develop the two-foot U18 shaped. So are you saying that you feel like 19 that is not something that you would suggest 20 again. 21 MR. COOKE: That may work. 22 MS. GUPTA: Okay.

### 202-234-4433 Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Page 147 1 MR. COOKE: That may be acceptable.

2 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: Pekka.

3 DR. HAKKARAINEN: Pekka 4 Hakkarainen. I have another question then. 5 When I'm looking at the baseline values for 6 the eight-foot HO at 92 lumens per watt that 7 matches 2009 Rule and then when I'm looking at 8 the four-foot T8 the baseline is shown as 92.3 9 which is not the same as the 2009 Rule. It's 10 significantly higher than that. 11 What's the rationale for these 12 differences? 13 MS. GUPTA: Yes. So this is Mimi 14 Gupta. This brings up a kind of complex issue 15 that occurred in the last rulemaking where DOE 16 had done its engineering analysis based on 17 commercially-available products and the 18 Catalog performance of those products. But 19 then when going to set the efficiency levels, 20 it noted that the reported efficacy for those 21 products, that manufacturers were submitting 22 to DOE were sometimes different than maybe the

### 202-234-4433 Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Page 148 1 long-term average efficacies in Catalogs. So 2 DOE set standards based on the reported value. 3 So, for example, for this four-foot 4 medium bipin lamp at 92.3 lumens per watt 5 rated efficacy, when DOE matched that lamp to 6 what was being reported as an efficacy in its 7 compliance reports it had a lumens per watt of 8 whatever the standard was set at, 89. So 9 that's where the discrepancy comes from. 10 And I guess this is something that 11 we're interested in understanding is if you 12 have a lamp right now that you're marketing 13 with an initial light output of 3000 lumens 14 per watt is that going to be the minimally 15 compliant lamp. Or is there going to be a 16 2900 lumen per watt lamp that's -- 17 (Off the record comment.) 18 I mean initial lumens. 19 (Off the record comment.) 20 Right. Because DOE tries to base 21 its analysis on commercially-available 22 products wherever possible. We're trying to

### 202-234-4433 Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Page 149 1 understand based on the products that you're 2 selling right now what is going to be the 3 minimally-compliant lamp that you sell in July

4 of 2012. 5 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: Susan, 6 please. 7 MS. ANDERSON: There's always a 8 tolerance for every -- We all have to have 9 that because there is variation in components 10 and manufacturing. But I guess my question is 11 why wouldn't the baseline be at least what the 12 standard was last time. 13 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: Go ahead, 14 Charlie.

15 MR. STEPHENS: Let me ask a 16 question here that might help get at this from 17 a different angle. I don't know what rated 18 efficacy means. I know what the certified 19 number means when a manufacturer certifies 20 that number to DOE. Are you suggesting, Mimi, 21 that the certified efficacy of that lamp is 89 22 and whatever rated efficacy is is the Catalog

### 202-234-4433 Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Page 150 1 efficacy? Is that what we're seeing here?

2 MS. GUPTA: Yes. So the rated 3 efficacy here represents the initial light 4 output divided by the rated wattage of the 5 lamp. So it would be 3000 lumens divided by

6 32.5 watts. 7 MR. COOKE: That's not going to be

8 92.3. 9 MS. GUPTA: The question is your 10 initial light output, is that a measured or 11 declared value? Sorry.

12 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: It's close 13 to it I think. 14 MS. CURRY: Sorry. Ku'uipo Curry. 15 Your initial light output is declared values. 16 MS. GUPTA: Yes, Catalog. 17 MS. CURRY: And your nominal watts 18 -- They're both declared numbers.

19 MS. GUPTA: It's rated. We use the

20 rated watts.

21 MS. ANDERSON: We use the ANSI. 22 MS. GUPTA: The ANSI rated wattage.

### 202-234-4433 Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Page 151 1 MS. ANDERSON: So for a four-foot 2 T8 that would be 32.5. (Inaudible) as opposed

3 to 32. 4 MS. GUPTA: Right.

5 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: But then 6 going to Susan's question or Susan's comment 7 about there's always a range there, what would 8 DOE wish to have? The lower end of the range 9 or the middle of the range or the top end of 10 the range? What are you trying to get at? 11 MS. GUPTA: Well, I'm not making 12 any statements about where within the range 13 DOE thinks it should be. But I'm just saying 14 what was done previously was that when 15 comparing these rated efficacy values to what 16 this lamp is reported as for compliance there 17 was a difference. 18 And maybe manufacturers can comment 19 more to why there is that difference. Is it 20 because of just tolerances? Is it because 21 when you report efficacy for compliance 22 purposes there's a specific equation that you

### 202-234-4433 Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Page 152 1 use? 2 There was a difference. And so 3 because DOE's analysis was based on 4 commercially-available products it tried to 5 accurately set a standard that maintained the 6 commercially-available products that the 7 standard intended to if that makes sense. 8 MS. ANDERSON: Our reporting though 9 was based on a continuously-rolling 12 month 10 average. 11 MS. GUPTA: Right. 12 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: Charlie. 13 MR. STEPHENS: This is Charlie 14 Stephens. 15 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: Thank you, 16 Susan, for that. 17 Charlie. 18 MR. STEPHENS: You know as somebody 19 who has to follow this as the rulemaking goes 20 along I guess I'm okay with whatever the 21 numbers are up there as long as I understand 22 what they represent. I suppose you could also

### 202-234-4433 Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Page 153 1 take the certified values, lumens, watts and 2 efficacy, all three of which are likely to be 3 different coming out of testing and 4 certification. 5 But if what you're featuring here 6 is what DOE thinks is a common lamp that 7 represents a large share of the market and 8 you're buying them off to analyze and you're 9 looking at prices in catalogs and trying to 10 identify what lamp in the catalog has what 11 price associated with it or online or wherever 12 you're getting your data, then I suspect 13 that's the data you're going to see for that 14 lamp in a catalog or online regardless of what 15 the certified numbers are because it seems 16 you're testing. And the certification numbers 17 can be different. But it's the same lamp as I 18 understand what you're saying. 19 MS. GUPTA: That is correct. 20 MR. STEPHENS: Okay. I'm okay with

21 that. 22 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: Thanks,

### 202-234-4433 Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Page 154 1 Mimi.

2 Steve Rosenstock. 3 MR. ROSENSTOCK: Steve Rosenstock, 4 EEI. You know the Rule says that minimum 5 average lamp efficacy in terms of the standard 6 which is 89 now. And so just in terms of just 7 thinking down the road in terms of the 8 analysis, basically what you're planning to do 9 is again you're going to use that 92.3 as the 10 I'll say -- There's the baseline. The 11 standard says 89. But what you're going to 12 say is for your analysis of potentially any 13 new standard you're going to use a 92.3 as a 14 baseline for doing any sort of energy 15 analysis, cost analysis, etc. Is that the 16 plan? 17 MS. GUPTA: Yes. Really what 18 matters in terms of the energy analysis is the 19 rated wattage of the lamp and to some extent 20 the lumen output of the lamp. And so those -- 21 in the previous rulemaking, we used the values 22 in catalogs. And that is what we propose to

### 202-234-4433 Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Page 155 1 do for this rulemaking also. 2 MR. ROSENSTOCK: Initial lumens or

3 mean lumens. 4 MS. GUPTA: No, you're right. Mean

5 lumens. 6 MS. ANDERSON: You always used 7 initial.

8 MS. GUPTA: In terms of -- We've 9 used initial in terms of what?

10 MS. ANDERSON: The standards have 11 always been initial. 12 MS. GUPTA: Right. The standards 13 are in terms of initial efficacy. But in 14 terms of determining what the energy use is 15 going to be of the system and in terms of what 16 the higher efficiency replacements are going 17 to be, we use mean lumens to compare different 18 lamps. 19 So, for example, before in the last 20 rulemaking, we said a T12 system with a 21 certain mean lumens is a replacement for a T8 22 system with a similar mean lumens. So in that

### 202-234-4433 Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Page 156 1 sense we were comparing -- we were using mean

2 lumens. 3 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: The average

4 lumens. 5 DR. HAKKARAINEN: Yes, I'm 6 completely lost. 7 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: The average 8 lumens was there for the purpose of 9 comparability. 10 Mimi. 11 MS. GUPTA: Yes, the mean lumens, 12 it's different than average, was there for the 13 purpose of comparing different systems to 14 ensure that they have similar light output. 15 Initial lumens is used to determine the 16 efficacy. 17 MS. ANDERSON: Okay. You're going 18 based on the fact that when you actually 19 design the lighting system you use mean 20 lumens, not initial lumens.

21 MS. GUPTA: Yes. 22 MS. ANDERSON: Okay.

### 202-234-4433 Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Page 157 1 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: Okay. 2 Mike. 3 MR. McGARAGHAN: Mike McGaraghan. 4 I would just ask that as you go through the 5 rulemaking maybe provide both, rated efficacy 6 and reported efficacy. Last time I think you 7 got datasets from various manufacturers with 8 their own test data. And I think that that 9 was confidential. So that's a tied in comment 10 here is I think it's very important for DOE to 11 get data from manufacturers that is the 12 reported data. 13 Rated efficacy is much less 14 important without a real standard for how it's 15 derived or without certification behind it. 16 Reported is much more important, but a lot of 17 stakeholders couldn't see it last time. So we 18 would encourage you to use that data, make it 19 public, redact it as necessary so that we can 20 all see it and then any time you're going to 21 use one or the other throughout the whole 22 rulemaking make it really clear what you're

### 202-234-4433 Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Page 158 1 using and define both.

2 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: I see some 3 heads nodding around the table. Charlie. 4 MR. STEPHENS: Yes, let me just 5 emphasize that we really -- It would help us 6 all to have definitions for this stuff even if 7 it's not a term of art in the standards. It 8 really would help to know what you mean by 9 "rated efficiency." And is that different 10 than "catalog efficiency"? You know, when 11 you're using these terms it would really help 12 to have them defined well. 13 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: Okay. Thank 14 you. 15 So then I thought we shed some 16 light on that one. Let's move on. 17 MS. HUSAIN: Sorry. I don't know 18 what I do here, but this keeps freezing. 19 (Off the record discussion.) 20 Okay. All right. For IRLs, DOE is 21 considering lamps with standard spectrum 22 voltage ratings less than 125 volts and

### 202-234-4433 Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Page 159 1 diameters greater than 2.5 inches as 2 representatives. As for the GSFLs, DOE is 3 planning to consider as baselines lamps with 4 characteristics which met the standards 5 adopted in the 2009 Lamps Rule. 6 In determining IRL standards in the 7 2009 Lamps Rule, DOE projected that 8 manufacturers would sell reduced wattage lamps 9 with light outputs similar to higher wattage 10 lamps. So, for a 50 watt, DOE projected 11 manufacturers would sell a 40 watt, for a 75 a

12 55 watt and for a 90 watt a 66 watt. 13 We are interested to know if the 14 resulting wattages and lifetimes shown in this 15 table are representative of the products 16 expected to be sold on the market in 2012.

17 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: Steve

18 Rosenstock. 19 MR. ROSENSTOCK: Steve Rosenstock, 20 EEI. In terms of PAR 38s again I'm just 21 talking and thinking from my hardware store 22 experience. I don't know if I've ever seen a

### 202-234-4433 Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Page 160 1 66 watt PAR 38 on the shelf. Maybe I was 2 looking in the wrong place, but I have never 3 seen that out there. I'm sure it exists 4 because you do incandescent NE wattage, but 5 I've never seen it. So I don't know how 6 representative that is. 7 MR. COOKE: NEMA also agrees with 8 Steve. And we disagree with using model lamp 9 designs that are not commercially available as 10 baseline lamp characteristics. We believe it

11 should be based on real world. And we're not 12 producing these lamps yet. So we don't know 13 how you can establish such a baseline. 14 MS. GUPTA: This is Mimi Gupta. I 15 think this is exactly what this slide is 16 looking for information on. What wattages do 17 you expect to be the most common wattages in

18 2012? 19 These wattages, yes. There is no 20 66 watt lamp that is out there. But that was 21 the equal lumen replacement that we had 22 calculated for the 90 watt lamp that met the

### 202-234-4433 Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Page 161 1 standard. So if -- Are manufacturers going to 2 continue to sell a 90 watt lamp in 2012 or are 3 they going to sell a 65 watt lamp to replace 4 that 90 watt lamp? 5 MR. COOKE: Well, even then, we 6 still don't know what the lumen output will be 7 until we actually start producing them. 8 That's the normal process. 9 MS. ANDERSON: We aren't making 10 these products yet.

11 MR. COOKE: We're under 12 development. 13 MS. GUPTA: Okay.

14 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: Susan. 15 MS. ANDERSON: That was part of the 16 point we tried to make earlier. We aren't 17 that far along yet. We're still installing 18 equipment and testing equipment and we haven't 19 made commercially viable production lines yet. 20 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: Okay. 21 MS. ANDERSON: This is really 22 jumping the gun.

### 202-234-4433 Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Page 162 1 MR. COOKE: It's problematic. 2 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: Okay. 3 Mike. 4 MR. McGARAGHAN: Mike McGaraghan, 5 California Utilities. I had a comment on the 6 lifetime assumptions for the baseline here. 7 Someone can correct me if I'm wrong, but my 8 understanding is that lamp lumens and lifetime 9 fight against each other in an incandescent 10 lamp. 11 And moving to an HIR source you can 12 either greatly improve the light output or the 13 lifetime or sort of somewhere in the middle. 14 You can improve both of them a little bit. So 15 I think most HIR products have improved 16 efficacy and improved lifetime. But there is 17 no reason to think that the new baseline 18 should be a 4000 hour lamp in my mind if 19 current products out there typically have a 20 1500 to 2000 hour lifetime. 21 It seems to me that should still be 22 the baseline assumption so that if

### 202-234-4433 Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Page 163 1 manufacturers want to make a 4000 hour lamp 2 then they would market that as a long life 3 lamp. It would be a different kind of 4 product. Again, that goes back to the point 5 where they're in the middle of the product 6 design and we don't have these products yet 7 until July of next year necessarily. 8 But just a suggestion to DOE to 9 consider that maintaining the lamp life to be 10 consistent with current lamp life baselines. 11 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: Thank you. 12 MR. McGARAGHAN: Also, I think I 13 missed my chance a few slides ago on the 14 fluorescent baseline. DOE asked for comment15 on whether it should consider minimally16 compliant T8s the baseline.

17 So now all the manufacturers are 18 making high CRI T12 lamps with very poor 19 efficacies relative to T8s. My suggestion is 20 that would be the baseline product for that 21 especially for a four foot medium bipin 22 product class.

### 202-234-4433 Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Page 164 1 MR. ROSENSTOCK: Sorry. What lamp 2 was that? Steven Rosenstock, EEI.

3 MR. McGARAGHAN: There are now T12 4 lamps with high CRI and the definition of GSFL 5 is any fluorescent lamp with a CRI of less 6 than 87. So these lamps are exempt from 7 standards or they're not covered by standards. 8 So these T12 lamps would continue to be 9 manufactured throughout next year as I 10 understand it. And they would still be 11 competing with the more efficient T8s. 12 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: Susan, go

13 ahead. 14 MS. ANDERSON: Those T12 lamps like 15 Cool White Deluxe, Daylight Deluxe, they've 16 been around for decades. They're not new 17 products. And the exemption is there for the 18 applications where color evaluation is 19 critical. And it's not a high volume 20 application. 21 MR. McGARAGHAN: Thank you for 22 pointing that out. I'm actually referring to

### 202-234-4433 Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Page 165 1 an Osram piece of literature I saw that 2 suggested there's a new T12 lamp that's due 3 out 2011 and I wasn't sure if it was already 4 out or coming out. Are you familiar with -- 5 MS. ANDERSON: Yes, I know. It's - 6 - That product has never been made.

7 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: Never been

8 made?

9 MS. ANDERSON: Never been made. 10 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: Okay. 11 MR. McGARAGHAN: Okay. So anyways 12 there was this suggestion that new products 13 were coming online. Regardless of whether or 14 not that happens, there are existing T12 15 products that will continue to be made and 16 will continue to be replacements through next 17 year. And they're not covered by standards. 18 And the suggestion is that those should be the 19 baseline product for us. 20 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: I saw Tim 21 first. Tim Ballo. 22 MR. BALLO: Tim Ballo. I think the

### 202-234-4433 Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Page 166 1 problem with that though is if they're not 2 covered they don't go away. And so you can 3 use them as the baseline, but they're still 4 there. The standards won't get rid of them. 5 So how do you measure the impact of standards

6 then?

7 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: Joanna. 8 MS. MAUER: I think maybe instead 9 of -- and I don't know -- if manufacturers are 10 planning to produce T12 products that are 11 covered by the standards that would be able to 12 meet the 2012 standards. If we expect them to 13 make up some significant portion of the 14 market, then it seems to make sense to 15 consider those in the baseline.

16 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: Steve

17 Rosenstock. 18 MR. ROSENSTOCK: Steve Rosenstock, 19 EEI. If you look at the 2009 final rule there 20 are no T12s. As of next July, T12s don't meet 21 the new standards. And all the -- I'll say 22 the general service T12s that have been in

### 202-234-4433 Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Page 167 1 existence are stopped as of July of 2012. 2 I'm just saying in terms of the 3 existing product that's being analyzed in the 4 last rule the existing T12s go away as of next 5 July. There's no baseline for them anymore.

6 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: Susan.

7 MS. ANDERSON: There are T12 8 products in the marketplace that meet the 9 standards that go into effect next July 14th.

10 MR. COOKE: Correct. 11 MR. McGARAGHAN: At what CRI,

12 Susan? 13 MS. ANDERSON: Regular CRIs. 14 MR. McGARAGHAN: Okay. 15 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: Okay. So 16 then that was Mike and now to Charlie Stevens. 17 MR. STEPHENS: Yes. I think we'll 18 probably weigh in on this in a little more 19 detail. But I don't think that you can do a 20 baseline for this with only T8s. I think 21 you're going to have to look at T12s. 22 And I think just as the industry

### 202-234-4433 Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Page 168 1 was saying here just a minute ago that the 2 incandescent IRL products that are in theory 3 going to meet the standard aren't available to 4 evaluate just now. I think these T12 products 5 we're talking about may not entirely be 6 available right now either. A couple of them 7 are. But there will be more I'm sure than 8 there are at this minute. 9 (Off the record comment.) 10 Right, I understand. But they 11 aren't priced -- The several years ago price 12 is not the price that you're going to get for 13 them starting now I think. Right? 14 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: Susan, go

15 ahead. 16 MS. ANDERSON: They're not my 17 products. They're Philip's products. 18 MR. STEPHENS: Right. 19 MS. ANDERSON: But they've been in 20 the marketplace for several years. And they 21 use the rare earth phosphor technology. So 22 they're being impacted by this rare earth

### 202-234-4433 Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Page 169 1 price increase just like T8s and T5s and 2 compact fluorescents. 3 MR. STEPHENS: Yes. I spent all 4 week last week on the phone with procurement 5 officials about that. So I understand that. 6 But what I'm saying is that there's a reason 7 why they should be in the baseline. Are you 8 agreeing with me that they should be in the 9 baseline? 10 MR. COOKE: We agree. 11 MR. STEPHENS: Okay. Thank you. 12 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: Thanks, 13 Keith. Thanks, Susan. Okay. So any other 14 things to cover here because I'm feeling like 15 we're starting to -- We're ready to move on. 16 Yes, Tina.

17 TINA KAARSBERG: Would now be a 18 good time for me to say something a little 19 tiny bit about rare earth since we were just 20 talking about it. 21 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: Okay. 22 DR. KAARSBERG: Okay. While I was

### 202-234-4433 Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Page 170 1 away at lunch and looking at my email, I 2 received an email that said that the prices 3 for some of the rare earths had declined from 4 June to October from $135 a kilogram to $90 a 5 kilogram. And you know this is just -- Well, 6 it's based on some market or something like

7 that. 8 MS. KOHL: Is it the Wall Street 9 Journal article? 10 DR. KAARSBERG: Oh yeah. The Wall 11 Street Journal. Yeah, it was just the Wall 12 Street Journal. But I guess I'm saying it's - 13 - As you can tell, we're starting to follow 14 this issue and we do want to engage with you 15 on this. 16 I don't know what exactly can be 17 done about it. But it is pretty amazing what 18 the prices do and how quickly they go up and 19 also how quickly they go down. And I just 20 wanted to mention that we are beginning to

21 track that. Thanks. 22 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: Okay.

### 202-234-4433 Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Page 171 1 Charlie Stephens. 2 MR. STEPHENS: Tina, did they say 3 which ones? I mean that's pretty specific. 4 DR. KAARSBERG: I apologize. This 5 particular one was -- Strangely a lot of them 6 went from $135-ish range to $92. But the 7 particular one I quoted was lanthanum which I 8 thought was used in lighting in some place. 9 It isn't? No, not really.

10 MR. STEPHENS: It's not one of the 11 three that are of most interest here. 12 DR. KAARSBERG: So Yttrium. 13 MR. STEPHENS: Terbium, Europium 14 and Yttrium.

15 DR. KAARSBERG: And what was the

16 other one? 17 MR. STEPHENS: Europium and 18 Yttrium. 19 DR. KAARSBERG: Yttrium. And there 20 is -- Okay. 21 MR. BOESENBERG: Alex Boesenberg. 22 Do you need me to clarify? I had this

### 202-234-4433 Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Page 172 1 mistake, too, and was corrected. So there is 2 a Ytterbium. It has few, if any, commercial 3 value. It is -- The Ytterbium is not one 4 we're concerned about. It is terbium, 5 Yttrium, Y-T-T-R-I-U-M, and Europium. Those

6 are the three that matter the most to us and 7 to the permanent magnet makers by the way who 8 compete with us for this product.

9 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: Susan. 10 MS. ANDERSON: I just want to say

11 that I had seen that Wall Street Journal 12 article, too. So I specifically followed up 13 with the CEO of the business unit that makes 14 fluorescent lamps and HID lamps by the way. 15 And he said that that seemed to be a short 16 term issue. But when you look at mid-range 17 and long-term projections the projections are 18 for the prices to continue to rise and the 19 supply to go down. Based on what we 20 understand China's doing with export --

21 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: That's 22 internally in your company.

### 202-234-4433 Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Page 173 1 MS. ANDERSON: Yes. 2 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: Okay. Thank 3 you. 4 Okay. Thanks for that update. And 5 I'm glad we clarified that. Let's proceed. 6 MS. HUSAIN: Okay. So now we'll 7 move to identifying higher efficacy 8 replacements. DOE will select more 9 efficacious lamps for each baseline lamp by 10 considering technologies not eliminated in a 11 screening analysis. When considering more 12 efficacious designs, DOE plans to consider 13 lamps that emit lumens greater than or equal 14 to the lumen output of the baseline lamp or 15 below that lamp by no more than 10 percent and 16 that result in energy savings. As mentioned, 17 DOE plans to primarily use a database of 18 commercially-available lamps to develop the 19 model lamps. 20 After identifying the more 21 efficacious substitutes for each baseline lamp 22 or a lamp and ballast system, DOE develops

### 202-234-4433 Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Page 174 1 efficacy levels or ELs based on three factors, 2 the design options associated with a specific 3 lamp, the ability of the lamps across wattages 4 to comply with the EL of a given product class 5 and the maximum technologically feasible 6 efficacy level or max tech. 7 Similar to the 2009 Lamps Rule, DOE 8 is not considering efficacy levels that would 9 require the use of reduced wattage GSFLs due 10 to potentially limited utility of these lamps. 11 For example, in the 2009 Lamps Rule, DOE did 12 not consider a four-foot medium bipin level 13 that could only be met by a 28 watt. And all 14 levels were set so they could be at least met 15 by one 32 watt lamp.

16 I also wanted to note here that DOE 17 plans to use certification reports as 18 mentioned to determine the reported efficacies 19 of the lamps to develop continuous equations 20 for efficacy levels. 21 In the 2009 Lamps Rule, DOE 22 identified five efficacy levels for both GSFLs

### 202-234-4433 Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Page 175 1 and IRLs and adopted the second highest 2 efficacy level. Therefore, DOE is generally 3 considering establishing the highest efficacy 4 level identified in the 2009 Lamps Rule as EL1 5 for this rulemaking. 6 Based on this methodology for 7 almost all lamp types EL1 will be represented 8 by the max tech levels that are in the 2009 9 Lamps Rule. These levels for GSFLs are shown 10 in this table.

11 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: Steve

12 Rosenstock. 13 MR. ROSENSTOCK: Steve Rosenstock, 14 EEI. And it's also assumed for the 15 incandescents as you'll see in the next slide. 16 It looks like your -- Again, you only have one 17 option which is a max tech option based on 18 this slide and based on -- And again, I really 19 appreciate the slide because it was not shown 20 this way in the framework document. 21 This is really -- It's a very, very 22 usable clarification and I wish it would have

### 202-234-4433 Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Page 176 1 shown up in the framework document for those 2 who can't be at this meeting because the issue 3 as with other rulemakings that I've been to 4 and I've been going to these for many years is 5 usually there's at least three, four or five 6 options in terms of efficiency levels. 7 You look at this document. You're 8 looking at one option and it's max tech only. 9 No other options. No other choices. No other 10 possibilities for the manufacturers or the

11 consumers. 12 And again obviously like for 13 example for the eight foot SP slimline, the 14 baseline is 97 and you're looking at 98 lumens 15 per watt. I mean there is very little wiggle 16 room there. And my concern is that only 17 having a max tech choice, is that really 18 beneficial to consumers whether it's 19 residential or commercial? I'm not sure. 20 I know there are other technologies 21 out there that maybe are above this. That's 22 great. But just having one option and only

### 202-234-4433 Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Page 177 1 have a max tech option I think that's just to 2 me is just unprecedented. I've never seen it. 3 Thank you. 4 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: Thank you. 5 Any additional comments on this

6 table? 7 MS. GUPTA: This is Mimi. I just 8 wanted to note this table and the table on the 9 next page are in the framework document as

10 Tables 6.5 and 6.6. 11 MR. ROSENSTOCK: Steve Rosenstock, 12 EEI. I understand that, but in the framework 13 document it doesn't show any language that 14 says that these are max tech. It just has 15 efficacy level, but it doesn't say anything 16 about the fact that they're actually really 17 max tech option based on the previous 18 rulemaking at all. 19 MS. GUPTA: I see. Okay. 20 MR. ROSENSTOCK: I mean it's one 21 thing to show efficiency level. But then it's 22 really max tech. So people just looking at it

### 202-234-4433 Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Page 178 1 say, "Oh, here's one option that they might be 2 looking at" versus "This is the max tech that 3 might be out there based on a previous 4 analysis." There's a big difference. 5 MS. GUPTA: It does say that it's 6 max tech in the paragraph before it. 7 MR. ROSENSTOCK: Sorry. 8 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: Okay. Yes.

9 Joanna. 10 MS. MAUER: Just a quick 11 clarification question. So these lumen per 12 watt values are not -- Is it fair to say 13 they're not directly comparable to the lumen 14 per watt, the rated efficacy values, that are 15 in the table of baseline efficacy values? 16 Because these would -- This would be what the 17 standard would be as opposed to what the rated 18 value might be.

19 MR. ROSENSTOCK: So these are 20 certified values. 21 MS. MAUER: Thank you. 22 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: Mimi say it

### 202-234-4433 Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Page 179 1 again.

2 MS. GUPTA: That's correct. 3 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: Thank you. 4 I didn't want that to be lost. 5 Mike. 6 MR. McGARAGHAN: Mike McGaraghan, 7 California IEs. I have a comment about these 8 levels, EL1, and also DOE's approach to 9 establishing what it's calling max tech. This 10 is related to the comment I made earlier about 11 the four criteria for screening. 12 A couple of places in the framework 13 document, DOE explains which technologies it's 14 going forward with and which it's screening in 15 order to determine what the maximum potential 16 efficiency is. And then there are a couple of 17 places sort of later in the document it says18 and so DOE then determined the commercially19 available product was max tech. 20 And it seems to me like there's a 21 big disconnect especially early on in this 22 rulemaking. We're in the framework stage

### 202-234-4433 Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Page 180 1 right now and DOE it looks like is just 2 proposing to use what they determined was max 3 tech last time two years ago. 4 It's my understanding that early in 5 the rulemaking is when DOE is supposed to 6 identify what is really the maximum 7 technologically feasible level and work down 8 from there. And I know, for example, I'll 9 throw out the extra high lumen products. 10 Thirty-four hundred lumens is what TCP gets. 11 And I'm not suggesting that I think 12 3400 lumens is a great place to end up with a 13 standard. I don't know that. All I'm saying 14 is that at this stage in the rulemaking DOE

15 has to look farther than what was max tech two 16 years ago or what was commercially available 17 two years ago.

18 And I have the same comment for the 19 next couple slides for IRLs. I think in our 20 comments in the last rule we identified a lot 21 of different technology options to go beyond 22 in terms of prototype products.

### 202-234-4433 Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Page 181 1 So, yeah, commercially available 2 and max tech are frequently not the same 3 thing. This is the time in the rulemaking to 4 distinguish between those. 5 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: Okay. 6 Any additional comment here?

7 Susan. 8 MS. ANDERSON: I guess our concern 9 and we had this in the last rulemaking in 10 particular with IRL is that you don't base a 11 rulemaking on one or two samples that have 12 been made up in a lab. And you've never 13 proven that you can actually produce them in 14 real life on a regular production line because 15 there are differences. 16 It's just like everybody is all 17 enamored with all the lumen per watt ratings 18 that come out with solid state now. And what 19 you can do on a bench top in a lab is one 20 thing. But producing in high volume, that's 21 something else. 22 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: Okay.

### 202-234-4433 Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Page 182 1 Are we ready to move on? Okay.

2 MS. HUSAIN: Before we move on from 3 this slide, I just wanted to note an exception 4 which is the four foot T5 mini-bipin high 5 output lamp. There was only one standard 6 level proposed and adopted in the 2009 Lamps 7 Rule for this lamp. There are reduced wattage 8 T5 high output lamps with higher efficacies 9 than the levels adopted in the 2009 Lamps 10 Rule. However, due to the reduced wattage 11 lamps potential application limitations such 12 as inability to operate in cold temperatures 13 we had not factored them into the analysis. 14 So DOE requests comments on whether

15 the standard levels should be based on the 16 reduced wattage lamps and whether these lamps 17 are at the same utility as full wattage.

18 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: Susan. 19 MS. ANDERSON: Reduced wattage 20 lamps never have the same utility as full 21 wattage lamps. You're always going to have a 22 cold temperature issue, drafty condition

### 202-234-4433 Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Page 183 1 issue, with reduced wattage lamps and

2 fluorescent. 3 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: Okay. 4 Additional comments there? 5 (No verbal response.) 6 MS. HUSAIN: Okay. So this is 7 similar to the GSFL slide. These are IRLs. 8 We are also considering establishing EL1 at 9 the max tech level set in the 2009 Lamps Rule. 10 The table on this slide shows the power law 11 equation that represented the max tech level 12 in the 2009 Lamps Rule and associated efficacy 13 values determined for specific lamp types 14 based on the equation. 15 MR. ROSENSTOCK: Steven Rosenstock, 16 EEI. On the last slide, again just kind of 17 looking back at Slide 57 and Slide 61, it 18 looks like you're keeping the 40 watt par 30 19 and then you're reducing the wattage of the 20 other two lamps. 21 I guess I'm kind of curious why you 22 changed the wattage there in terms of some of

### 202-234-4433 Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Page 184 1 your analytical reasoning. You went from a 55 2 to a 51.7 watt lamp which I've never seen 3 anywhere and from a 66 down to a 60 watt par 4 38 in terms of some of the EL1 levels. 5 Again, you kept the 40 watt the same. 6 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: Okay.

7 Susan.

8 MS. ANDERSON: I can't comment on 9 the 51.7 or the 60 but this rulemaking covers 10 40 watts up to 205 watts.

11 MR. ROSENSTOCK: Thanks. 12 MS. ANDERSON: So 40 watts is the 13 bottom, the lowest wattage that's covered by 14 this rulemaking. 15 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: Okay. Did 16 you have anything additional? 17 MS. HUSAIN: No. I can look into 18 that and get back to you and answer.

19 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: To see how 20 that corresponds.

21 MS. HUSAIN: Yes. 22 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: Okay.

### 202-234-4433 Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Page 185 1 MS. GUPTA: I mean the 51.7 and the 2 60 came from the last rulemaking as higher 3 efficacy replacements that meet this level to 4 replace the 75 watt and the 90 watt lumen 5 packages, halogen lumen packages. So 6 obviously these higher efficacy replacements 7 will change if DOE changes the baselines that 8 they're evaluating. If the wattage is like we 9 discussed before like 66 watt changes, then 10 the baseline of the 60 watt higher efficacy 11 replacement would also change. 12 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: Keith. 13 MR. COOKE: But again these are 14 theoretical.

15 MS. GUPTA: Yes. 16 MR. COOKE: And really the baseline

17 should be based on real world actual. 18 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: Charlie. 19 MR. STEPHENS: Yes, I just want to 20 again ensure terms here. These are certified 21 values we're looking at here. Right? Because 22 if I'm not mistaken I have seen a 52 watt

### 202-234-4433 Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Page 186 1 lamp. I really doubt that I would ever walk 2 into a hardware store and see a lamp that had 3 a label on it that said 51.7 watts. But that 4 very well might be the certified value of what 5 its actual tested wattage is. Am I correct

6 or not?

7 MS. GUPTA: So these are -- 8 Especially for the model lamps these are not 9 certified values because there was no data on 10 which to based the certified values. In the 11 last rule, DOE looked at whether there was a 12 difference between certified values and 13 catalog performance for incandescent reflector 14 lamps and found that there was a slight 15 difference and tried to modify its equation to 16 match that difference in efficacy.

17 MR. STEPHENS: Yes. I've seen some 18 of the certified values and they aren't round 19 numbers in a lot of cases especially when 20 you're getting really close to meeting the 21 standard. They're what they tested at, but 22 you don't put that on the label.

### 202-234-4433 Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Page 187 1 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: So these -- 2 Are these certified values? They're not. 3 (Off the record comments.) 4 Yes, this is DOE's hypothesis.

5 Correct?

6 MS. GUPTA: That's correct. 7 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: Okay.

8 Pekka.

9 DR. HAKKARAINEN: Pekka 10 Hakkarainen. So I'm now quite concerned about

11 the factor 6.4 that has been chosen here. 12 It's not based on anything other than these 13 theoretical considerations. 14 And we heard earlier today that the 15 previous rulemaking effectively discontinued 16 the 130 volt rated lamps because of a high 17 standard that was set there. And this is 18 starting to be pretty close to that point. 19 The other thing to note in this 20 context is that according to this presentation 21 these values would be used in scaling for 22 other lamps that are not examined in the

### 202-234-4433 Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Page 188 1 rulemaking in this way. So scaling factors 2 would be used for other lamps. And I know 3 we're going to talk about that a little bit

4 later. 5 But at the time the 2009 Rule was 6 published at that time I went through the lamp 7 company catalogs there were no Par 20 lamps, 8 for example, that met the standard at that 9 time. So speaking for my friends from the 10 lamp companies, in 2009 you make them redesign 11 all of their products in that category. And 12 now you're going to do it again. 13 I'm concerned that this leads to a 14 significant reduction in available products in 15 reflector lamps. And when you look at the -- 16 Susan's company publishes what they call a 17 socket survey at the end of each year. 18 Last year that survey if I'm 19 remembering it right showed that in addition 20 to I think light output and color dimability 21 of light sources was a significantly important 22 issue for consumers when they were making

### 202-234-4433 Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Page 189 1 purchase decisions. And this is potentially 2 going to lead to a situation where that 3 utility is significantly sacrificed for the

4 consumers. 5 If the replacement, the only 6 replacement, is a CFL reflector lamp, then you 7 are going to not just take away the 8 spotlights. But you are also going to take 9 away the dimability. 10 I don't consider any of the 11 currently available CFL reflector lamps to be 12 anywhere near adequate. So this is very 13 concerning. 14 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: Okay. 15 Mike. 16 MR. McGARAGHAN: So, again I don't 17 think it's DOE's job at this stage to weigh 18 the economic pros and cons of each of these at 19 this stage. I think DOE's job is to identify 20 what can be done and it actually looks to me 21 like these numbers are sliding back. I 22 thought that the coefficient from 2009 for

### 202-234-4433 Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Page 190 1 TSL5 was 6.9, wasn't it?

2 MS. ANDERSON: That was for 3 (Inaudible). 4 MR. McGARAGHAN: Okay. Then I'm--

5 MS. GUPTA: 5.9. 6 (Off the record comment.) 7 MR. McGARAGHAN: The final rule was

8 5.9.

9 MS. GUPTA: Yes. 10 MR. McGARAGHAN: Okay. So 11 regardless looking at the far right column, 12 lumens per watt, we know that there are 13 products out there that are better than this. 14 GE has a whole product line that beats all of 15 those numbers. Phillips has a couple of 16 products and this is a couple of years that

17 beat these numbers. 18 And then DOE actually did some of 19 its own research and testing and found other 20 product and measured it at 27 lumens per watt 21 without the use of a proprietary reflector. 22 And our team at PG&E along with ASAP and NRDC

### 202-234-4433 Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Page 191 1 funded some other product testing and 2 development just to see what kind of 3 efficacies were possible and got upwards of 37 4 lumens per watt, 38 lumens per watt. And we 5 submitted it in our comment letter a pretty 6 detailed description of various methods, not 7 just the fanciest HIR coatings but three or 8 four different pathways to efficacy levels 9 that greatly exceed these. 10 So I think later down the road DOE 11 can look at those and consider comments like 12 Susan's. Is it feasible to manufacture in the 13 large quantity or not? Is it cost effective? 14 What would be the impacts to industry? 15 Those are perfectly valid 16 questions. But at this stage these numbers 17 don't represent max tech by any stretch of the 18 imagination. We can go so far beyond this and 19 we could two years ago. So I think DOE has 20 really stopped short here.

21 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: Alex. 22 MR. BOESENBERG: Out of curiosity

### 202-234-4433 Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Page 192 1 for these theoretical lamps you determined and 2 designed, how many of these did you produce 3 and how many got UL certified? 4 (Off the record comments.) 5 Okay. One of our challenges has 6 been actually passing safety standards with 7 some of the reduced size lamps. 8 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: Okay. 9 MR. McGARAGHAN: I'm sorry. 10 Reduced size lamps? 11 MR. BOESENBERG: The smaller you go 12 when you ram a halogen capsule in it it gets 13 too hot on the outside. 14 MR. McGARAGHAN: Okay. 15 MS. HUSAIN: Okay. 16 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: We're going

17 to move on. 18 Well, Keith and Susan, go right

19 ahead. 20 MS. ANDERSON: Go ahead, Keith. Go 21 first. 22 MR. COOKE: On Item 8, I do want to

### 202-234-4433 Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Page 193 1 express concern regarding the analysis. I 2 think the one thing that this thing falls 3 short on is understanding component 4 availability. And, in particular, you need to 5 include in your analysis of what's going to 6 happen with rare earth materials for the 7 (Inaudible) going forward. 8 That's going to make a huge 9 potential impact on what (Inaudible) be 10 included in the (Inaudible) 11 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: Okay. Thank 12 you. Yes, I would like to make sure we 13 address eight, 12 and 13 sufficiently. And as 14 I scan through them I'm not sure yet. 15 Go ahead, Susan. 16 MS. ANDERSON: Well, I was going to 17 kind of add on to what Alex was saying. You 18 reach a temperature point where you can no 19 longer use the IR coatings. They won't hold 20 up to the temperature. There are temperature 21 limits that you experience with those. And 22 you can't use them above a certain wattage.

### 202-234-4433 Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Page 194 1 Or if you shrink the size of the lamp so much 2 so much heat is trapped. The coatings will 3 just disintegrate. 4 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: Okay. 5 MR. McGARAGHAN: Yes. Actually, 6 the smaller lamp issue is one I've come 7 across. My understanding was the exact 8 opposite for the high wattage, the high lumen. 9 My understanding was that's when the best 10 halogen infrared lamps really shine when you 11 get to the really high power products. And I 12 wish Advanced Lighting was here because --

13 MS. ANDERSON: No. There's a 14 maximum temperature which we can actually use 15 the IR coatings. 16 MR. McGARAGHAN: My understanding 17 is we're not approaching that. 18 MS. ANDERSON: Yes, we have. 19 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: Thanks,

20 Susan.

21 Steve Rosenstock. 22 MR. ROSENSTOCK: Steven Rosenstock,

### 202-234-4433 Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Page 195 1 EEI. For the IRLs, I'm still a little

2 concerned based on what I've seen from other 3 rulemakings. I understand the need to 4 streamline the analysis. 5 But I'm getting a little worried 6 about some of the scaling in particular here 7 because of the fact that especially because -- 8 You know you're going to scale the larger 9 lamps to the smaller lamps and then higher 10 voltage to lower voltage and then two 11 different spectrums. I don't know how much

12 that -- 13 But there are certain things that 14 say is it really -- Is that number -- You set 15 it for this one particular lamp and then you 16 do it for all the other seven lamps shown in 17 the standards. Is it really scalable with 18 certain either technical or just space issues 19 sometimes? 20 I mean if you set it -- You're 21 doing all of the analysis just based on this 22 one lamp and then you're just extrapolating

### 202-234-4433 Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Page 196 1 the other seven lamps. Is it really scalable 2 or is there some sort of -- Maybe there might 3 be one way -- one standard deviation. But you 4 might be talking about three or four standard 5 deviations away where the equation, that 6 efficacy equation, really doesn't work. 7 Because you have to look at -- The 8 coefficients range right now from 4.2 to 6.8. 9 So obviously there is something significant 10 when you're looking at the lamps in terms of 11 how efficient can you make it. And you're 12 taking it to 5.9 and you're thinking "Oh, just 13 go 5.9 to 6.4. And then modify every other 14 equation the same way." You might not be able 15 to just because of certain either technical or 16 space or safety reasons. 17 So again there might be an issue. 18 And again we're not at the preliminary 19 analysis. But there might be an issue of you 20 might need some more sample lamps in this 21 category to really make the scaling more 22 appropriate. Just my thought just from like a

### 202-234-4433 Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Page 197 1 statistical analysis and just from what I've 2 seen of other rulemaking where you get just 3 too far away. The scaling just really doesn't

4 work. 5 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: Okay. 6 MR. ROSENSTOCK: Thank you.

7 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: So now shall

8 we -- 9 MS. HUSAIN: Okay.

10 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: Scan 11 through. Did they answer them sufficiently? 12 Do you have anything you could call out? 13 MS. HUSAIN: I think we've touched

14 on most of these. 15 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: Okay. 16 MS. HUSAIN: So actually the 17 comment that was just stated it's related to 18 the next two slides which is scaling products 19 not analyzed. As mentioned before, DOE will 20 determine efficacy levels for product classes 21 not analyzed by scaling. The level is 22 determined from representative product

### 202-234-4433 Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Page 198 1 classes. And we are considering using the 2 scaling factors developed in the 2009 Lamps

3 Rule. 4 And here is just a summary of them. 5 They've been mentioned before. For the two 6 foot, U-shaped lamp, DOE is considering a 7 reduction of 6.5 percent from the four foot 8 medium bipin lamps. For lamps with CCTs above 9 4500 Kelvin, DOE is considering a reduction in 10 the range of 1.1 to 6 percent for the lower

11 CCT levels. 12 For modified spectrum IRL versus 13 standard spectrum, considering a 15 percent 14 reduction. For small versus large diameter a 15 15.5 reduction. For 120 versus 130 16 considering a 15 percent increase. 17 DOE welcomes comments on it's 18 scaling methodology. 19 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: Any 20 additional comments on scaling factors? 21 (No verbal response.) 22 As Aisha said, these are built off

### 202-234-4433 Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Page 199 1 the 2009 Rule. Right? 2 (Off the record comment.) 3 Okay. So you ought to be familiar 4 with this.

5 Steve Rosenstock. 6 MR. ROSENSTOCK: So just a quick 7 one. Again, just getting back to the 8 incandescent, you're looking at 5.9 to 6.4 for

9 the under 120 volt. So would that mean for 10 the over 120 volt it would be a similar -- 11 Let's just say it's a ten percent just to make 12 it easy. You're going 6.8 to let's say 7.4. 13 Then you're adding 15 percent on top of that 14 in terms of scaling. 15 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: Okay. 16 MR. ROSENSTOCK: And that's why I'm 17 a little worried about some of these things. 18 You know, 5.9 to 6.4, apply it to the other 19 one and then add another 15 percent if I'm 20 doing it right. 21 MS. ANDERSON: Just, Steve, 22 remember 130 volts is already a dead issue

### 202-234-4433 Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Page 200 1 anyhow. They've already killed it. 2 MR. ROSENSTOCK: So I guess that 3 makes it easier. 4 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: Thank you,

5 Susan.

6 Pekka.

7 DR. HAKKARAINEN: And then 8 following on the discussion that we've had 9 that Alex started with the smaller diameter 10 lamps I'm not convinced that in my mind that 11 the scaling factor from 2009 is appropriate 12 anymore. They may want to do a different 13 analysis on the smaller diameter lamps. 14 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: Can you say 15 now what direction we should head in? 16 DR. KAARSBERG: Are you talking 17 about the coefficient or the exponent? 18 DR. HAKKARAINEN: I'm talking about 19 the second bullet or line. 20 DR. KAARSBERG: Oh, scaling. 21 DR. HAKKARAINEN: On the scaling 22 factors for IRLs. The 15.5 percent reduction

### 202-234-4433 Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Page 201 1 factor for small diameter. I'm not sure 2 that's appropriate. We don't know enough yet 3 at this point, but I'm concerned that that may 4 not be appropriate. 5 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: Okay. 6 Mike. 7 MR. McGARAGHAN: Mike McGaraghan on 8 that point. We also looked at the small 9 diameter lamp issue last time. I think DOE 10 came up with that scaling factor based on an11 assumption that you couldn't fit a double12 ended burner into small diameter lamps. And I 13 don't know if that's still the case. 14 At one point I know that Phillips 15 had an MR-16 product that was available in 16 Europe that had a double-ended burner with a 17 bulge over the lens. They bulged the lens in 18 order to fit a double-ended burner. 19 An MR-16 lamp is much smaller than 20 an AR20 or PAR20. So it seemed to us to be 21 shown to be feasible to fit a double-ended 22 burner in those lamps.

### 202-234-4433 Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Page 202 1 The other comment on modified 2 spectrum. I think we would probably make the 3 same comment we made last time. There's a 4 very specific definition of what it means to 5 be a modified spectrum lamp. And I think 6 there are -- We tested a bunch of different 7 products and found that there are some out 8 there being marketed as modified spectrum that 9 didn't actually meet the definition. 10 And I unfortunately don't have the 11 definition in front of me right now. But I 12 believe it's a three McAdams step from what is 13 considered standard spectrum. In establishing 14 the reduction factor for modified spectrum 15 lamps, DOE should consider what is the 16 efficiency loss for a product that just 17 changes those three McAdams steps. 18 If you test a product that actually 19 has a much greater spectrum shift and its 20 efficiency losses is greater, then you leave a 21 potential for a loop hole for a product that 22 might only modify the spectrum those three

### 202-234-4433 Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Page 203 1 McAdams steps and have a much smaller 2 efficiency loss. 3 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: Okay. 4 The comment box which follows on 5 the next slide just simply asks again for 6 comments related to scaling factors, the 7 specific ones here. So are there additional 8 comments on scaling factors? 9 (No verbal response.) 10 Okay. Then we're going to move on. 11 MS. HUSAIN: Okay. DOE would also 12 like comments on other aspects of engineering 13 analysis including proprietary design, 14 regulatory burdens or any other issues that 15 could affect the analysis, at this time.

16 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: Steve.

17 MR. ROSENSTOCK: Steve Rosenstock. 18 I just wanted to comment. It's always 19 encouraging to hear about some of these 20 advanced technologies. But again if they are 21 proprietary designs or everything on patents, 22 they're not going to be -- There's going to be

### 202-234-4433 Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Page 204 1 competitive effects if only one manufacturer, 2 one entity, can manufacture that product. 3 I think proprietary designs are 4 great and new technologies are great. But 5 unless there are multiple vendors of it that 6 could be an issue in the marketplace, 7 especially if the standard is set so high that 8 it knocks all the other competitors out of the 9 marketplace.

10 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: Susan. 11 MS. ANDERSON: The issue with 12 proprietary designs is that that needs to be 13 addressed individually with each company. 14 They really are not comments that we can make 15 in a public meeting like this. 16 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: Okay. 17 MS. HUSAIN: Okay. So I'll be 18 moving on to product price determination and 19 energy use analysis. The product price 20 determination analysis will establish end user 21 prices for lamp models. DOE is planning to 22 use the same approach it used in the 2009

### 202-234-4433 Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Page 205 1 Lamps Rule where prices were developed by 2 discounting blue book values to come up with 3 high, medium and low prices for each lamp. 4 The medium price ranges will be 5 used in the LCC and NIA analyses. And the low 6 and high price ranges will be used in the LCC 7 sensitivities. Where a blue book value is not 8 available for a lamp, the price will be 9 extrapolated from available lamp prices. In 10 addition, DOE plans to apply weighted average 11 sales tax data by region. DOE will also 12 conduct a price trends analysis and 13 investigate methods for forecasting future 14 prices. 15 DOE welcomes comments on its 16 proposed methodology for determining product 17 prices. 18 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: Keith.

19 MR. COOKE: We don't have a real 20 problem with the methodology. But we are very 21 interested in how you're going to factor in 22 this rare earth influence on the GSFLS. That

### 202-234-4433 Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Page 206 1 will be quite intriguing. 2 MS. GUPTA: This is Mimi. Yes, I 3 think this kind of goes back to one of the 4 comments that Aisha highlighted for on the 5 rare earth slide, understanding how rare earth 6 prices have changed for manufacturers in 7 recent history and what kind of change in lamp 8 price that resulted in. And that relationship 9 would be helpful to conduct an analysis. 10 MR. COOKE: The other part of it is 11 your analysis typically involves a 30 year

12 forecast. 13 MS. GUPTA: Right. 14 MR. COOKE: I don't know how you're 15 going to project those prices out 30 years. 16 DR. KAARSBERG: This is Tina. I 17 think we'll probably piggyback on some of the 18 department's analysis for rare earth elements 19 because it's really rare earth elements are 20 key to a lot of clean energy technologies. 21 And I think that -- And I've been talking -- I 22 admit Alex is the one who alerted me to the

### 202-234-4433 Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Page 207 1 DOE Critical Materials Report.

2 But I know some of the folks 3 working on it. I've been in touch with them. 4 And they're going to be looking at some 5 different like market scenarios and we hope to 6 be able to piggyback on that. Like, for 7 example, right now China accounts for 90 8 percent of the extraction and manufacturing of

9 all rare earth elements. But rare earth 10 elements are not only in China. They're 11 scattered throughout the earth's crust.

12 MR. COOKE: You need to be careful 13 of that because you need to understand which 14 ones were only used in the lighting industry. 15 And right now like Mountain Pass does not 16 produce the materials we need. 17 DR. KAARSBERG: Right. Right. 18 Well, I'm not going to speak to any specific 19 things. But my general understanding is that 20 there could be a strategy and coordination 21 with our partners where we try to in the long 22 term, you know, obviously not in the time set

### 202-234-4433 Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Page 208 1 of this rulemaking, but in terms of analyzing 2 where those kinds of things could go. We 3 would look at scenarios like that. And there

4 has been some talk about that. 5 So I can just assure you we are 6 going to include more analysis and it will 7 draw upon other DOE analysis. Apparently 8 ARPA-E is also looking at the whole issue as

9 well.

10 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: Alex. 11 MR. BOESENBERG: Alex Boesenberg, 12 NEMA. I mentioned it to Tina, but I'll state 13 it again for the benefit of everyone who 14 wasn't sitting with us in the courtyard last 15 week that for the mines that are being

16 restarted or that are scheduled for 17 groundbreaking to begin construction of a new 18 mine bear in mind the length of time it takes 19 to go from groundbreaking to actually being 20 able to supply those materials. It's measured 21 in years. 22 And the other thing that is worth

### 202-234-4433 Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Page 209 1 bearing in mind is the machines to perform the 2 extraction, the squeezers, whatever they do, 3 the bulk of the expertise in that methodology 4 all speak Chinese. If it's not a first 5 language, they've learned it because that's 6 where they live. So getting just the 7 expertise to even manage the extraction once 8 you've got the earth movers is a concern.

9 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: Susan. 10 MS. ANDERSON: I believe if you go 11 back to the information that NEMA supplied 12 during the last rulemaking it actually 13 included an independent analysis, an expert 14 analysis, on where the various rare earths 15 were located. So you might use that as a 16 reference going forward. 17 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: Okay. Thank 18 you. 19 Alex, go ahead. Follow on. 20 MR. BOESENBERG: Alex Boesenberg,

21 NEMA. I have a comment not related to rare 22 earth but to the cost analysis. I again

### 202-234-4433 Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Page 210 1 wanted to caution about too much postulation 2 regarding product price and product 3 availability. As we noted, manufacturers have 4 not yet decided. And it's a business decision 5 in as much as we're also grappling with 6 technological decisions. Manufacturers have 7 not cited what products they're going to offer 8 in July 2012. 9 So your life cycle cost 10 projections, the right answer might be zero 11 instead of $1, $2 because some folks might 12 just choose to shut those lines down as 13 nonprofitable because of the amount of 14 redesign and investment required for a 15 particular line of products. 16 And that's not something I'll be 17 able to comment on as the trade association 18 rep. But individual companies are making 19 those analyses now and will make those 20 decisions. We won't find out until July of 21 next year. 22 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: Charlie.

### 202-234-4433 Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Page 211 1 MR. STEPHENS: Charlie Stephens. 2 And the other -- Just a few things. First of 3 all, I would like to just recommend that the 4 Department for now focus on the methodology. 5 Obviously there are some missing pieces that 6 we won't have for a little while. But if we 7 have the methodology into which to insert 8 numbers later that would be adequate at this 9 stage. 10 Second, I think since we're all 11 talking dollars here I started modeling and 12 doing large scale modeling here some 40 years 13 ago. And I think I can speak with some 14 authority that since 2008 most anything you're 15 modeling involving dollars can be termed 16 chaotic at this point. We're in that period 17 and I don't see that changing. So I think 18 you're going to have to do the best you can to 19 just sort of draw straight lines through all 20 the jagged peaks and valleys because I think 21 that's kind of the realm we're in. 22 The third, if DOE does have any

### 202-234-4433 Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Page 212 1 holes in its pricing down the road when it 2 needs data and it comes from the market. My 3 organization is prepared to spend some money, 4 serious money if need be, to go get 5 marketplace data if you need it and to put it 6 on the public record. So let us know if you 7 have holes that we can fill.

8 MS. HUSAIN: Now we'll move onto 9 the energy use. The purpose of the energy use 10 characterization is to determine the energy 11 savings potential of energy efficiency 12 improvements. It does this by determining the 13 energy consumptions of lamps which is 14 calculated by multiplying the power rating by 15 the number of hours of operation per year. 16 This analysis will be an input to 17 both the LCC and the payback period and the 18 NIA. DOE plans to use various sources to 19 determine annual operating hours for 20 commercial, residential and industrial 21 sectors. These sources are listed here in the

22 second bullet.

### 202-234-4433 Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Page 213 1 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: Steve

2 Rosenstock. 3 MR. ROSENSTOCK: Steve Rosenstock, 4 EEI. Just a comment on especially this 5 methodology and the residential sector. I 6 think it's really important. I think RECS 7 does do a good job, but I think there are some 8 big factors there that are really having a 9 huge impact on lighting, energy use and the 10 residential sector. Based on date from Energy 11 Star actually it looks like compact 12 fluorescents have got a 20 percent market 13 share starting in 2006 and 2007. And it's 14 stayed pretty steady. Maybe it's declined a 15 little bit down to like 15 percent. 16 But that CFLs have replaced a lot 17 of incandescents in the homes and they're 18 typically put into the most used fixtures 19 because Energy Star says especially for CFL 20 operation they're best used in the actual 21 light fixtures that are operated two, three, 22 four hours a day in your home which are the

### 202-234-4433 Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Page 214 1 ones that are going to be responsible for a 2 good 50, 60, 70 percent of the lighting energy 3 usage. 4 The other factor that's considered 5 if possible for this methodology is the fact 6 that you know a lot of homes do have dimmers. 7 And a lot of dimmers are used. So that will 8 have an impact in both the baseline energy 9 usage as well as the projected energy usage. 10 I don't know if RECS actually has 11 information that describes in detail 12 percentage of dimmers and how many lights are 13 actually used with dimmers. But I think it 14 does play a role in some -- That will play a 15 role in the methodology. 16 And, of course, the other factor 17 especially in the residential sector is just 18 the diversity, just the fact that you have 19 some residential factors that are on three, 20 four, five hours a day and other factors that 21 might be on three hours a month based on their 22 location. And you obviously in terms of life

### 202-234-4433 Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Page 215 1 cycle cost and payback analysis the range in 2 the residential sector will be very, very 3 wide. 4 So I hope that in this methodology 5 that it's not assumed that every single light 6 bulb replaced is on for three or four hours a 7 day in the residential sector because that 8 will overstate the savings by a huge magnitude 9 in that sector. Thank you. 10 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: Susan first. 11 MS. ANDERSON: I have a question 12 and then a comment. When is the Lighting 13 Market Characterization Study 2011 going to be 14 available? 15 MS. GUPTA: Mimi. 16 MS. GUPTA: This is Mimi. 17 Hopefully in 2011. 18 MS. ANDERSON: Okay. If you go 19 back and look at the one published in 2003 20 incandescent reflectors in residences were 21 used 2.4 hours. That was the typical. 22 And I believe as I read the

### 202-234-4433 Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Page 216 1 document it talked about averaging use across 2 the market sectors. And I would certainly 3 hope that residences -- I read that would 4 never be averaged in with commercial because 5 there's such a substantial difference in 6 operating hours. And it would be totally 7 unfair to the residential user to evaluate 8 them based on average rather than their actual 9 short operating hours. 10 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: Charlie. 11 MR. STEPHENS: Charlie Stephens. 12 In reference to what I said earlier, we are13 currently spending money to do a fixture-by14 fixture metering study in residential, 15 something of the order of 2200 fixtures by 16 fixture type. And we'll have some pretty 17 refined data that should be able to be 18 combined with what California got earlier. 19 We'll get the first sample of that 20 data in January or February of next year. And 21 we're going to be metering for a year 22 initially. So we'll probably have data about

### 202-234-4433 Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Page 217 1 a year from now, a year's worth of data a 2 little over a year from now. We'll be doing 3 the same thing in the commercial sector 4 starting in 2012, fixture-by-fixture hours, 5 fixture type, along with a survey. 6 And we'll have all the demographics 7 of all of the households down to the ages of 8 the people who live there and everything else 9 to go with it. And that data will be made 10 publicly available once it's cleaned up so you 11 can use it. 12 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: Okay. 13 Keith. 14 MR. COOKE: The other thing we've 15 got to be careful of is that by taking a look 16 at just the appliances that goes to the system 17 we may be misleading ourselves. It goes back 18 to what Pekka was saying earlier where if we 19 set the standard high enough that it actually 20 eliminates the existing incandescent reflector 21 lamps. And we replace them with CFLs and 22 people quit using their dimmers because of the

### 202-234-4433 Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Page 218 1 fact that they don't like the results. Your 2 energy usage could actually go up as opposed

3 to down. 4 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: Okay.

5 Susan. 6 MS. ANDERSON: Actually dimming was 7 the issue that I was going to bring up. And I 8 made a phone call on behalf of NEMA a couple 9 of months ago to try to find out about the 10 residential programs that NSTAR and a couple 11 of other utilities in the northeast have going 12 that is actually doing testing of installing 13 lighting control systems in homes. And the 14 gentleman that I spoke with is actually with 15 the company that's managing the project. So 16 they were using a 20 some percent energy 17 savings for people using dimmers. 18 And I asked him where he got that 19 number because NEMA was looking at actually 20 funding a study. And we've been working with 21 California Lighting Technology Center on that. 22 And if somebody's already done the study, then

### 202-234-4433 Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Page 219 1 we don't need to. 2 And he said that information came 3 from the DOE. And I tried searching on their 4 website and so did Alex. And where he 5 referred to the Better Homes I think it is. 6 DR. KAARSBERG: Better buildings. 7 MS. ANDERSON: Better buildings. 8 And I could not find it referenced there. But 9 if the DOE has already determined that using 10 dimmers that provides a 27 percent energy 11 savings, that's substantial. And it goes to 12 show the importance of using dimmers. I mean 13 I for one have virtually every fixture in my 14 house on a dimmer. 15 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: Pekka,

16 follow on. 17 DR. HAKKARAINEN: I was actually 18 quickly going to ask Charlie about his study. 19 Are you documenting whether our lighting 20 controls on any of those circuits including 21 dimmers since we've been talking about this. 22 MR. STEPHENS: Absolutely. We'll

### 202-234-4433 Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Page 220 1 know all of that. Every fixture. 2 DR. HAKKARAINEN: That's great. He 3 may provide another answer to this question. 4 I'd like to chat with you during the break a 5 little bit. 6 MR. STEPHENS: No problem.

7 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: Great. 8 Yes, Tina.

9 DR. KAARSBERG: I had a follow-on. 10 Some of you are probably well aware that we 11 had a lighting system or luminaire RFI out on 12 the street. And I think in that document we 13 quoted someone else saying that lighting 14 controls which can include dimmers, but I 15 think it was controls can save 30 percent. 16 But it wasn't a DOE study. It was from 17 somewhere. But I do remember that. So it's 18 possible that there was -- 19 DR. HAKKARAINEN: This is Pekka. 20 There are lots of studies in commercial 21 buildings that document savings from lighting 22 controls of all kinds. We have been recently

### 202-234-4433 Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Page 221 1 concerned about the lack of data regarding 2 residential applications. 3 But we're getting some new 4 information here which is very helpful. If 5 you are able to point us to a DOE reference, 6 in particular what Susan cited, the 27 percent 7 please let us know what it is.

8 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: Susan. I'm 9 sorry, Tina. Go ahead. 10 DR. KAARSBERG: I was just going to 11 say I'll look through the whole docket again. 12 And we're also doing a summary of all the 13 comments we got. And we'll have some kind of 14 output on that. 15 But I will be following it up. And 16 anything we do get from then on if you're on 17 my lighting list you'll get it. You'll get an

18 announcement. 19 MS. ANDERSON: We were actually 20 following up on it because of Energy Star 21 because we would like to see lighting controls 22 have a -- There would be a lighting category

### 202-234-4433 Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Page 222 1 under Energy Star for lighting controls. 2 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: Charlie. 3 MR. STEPHENS: I will add before 4 people get excited about controls. The worst 5 case we did find in California was a house -- 6 it was a large house granted -- where the 7 lighting control system used 900 watts 24/7 8 with all the lights off. So we don't 9 automatically assume savings with control 10 systems. 11 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: Okay. Let's 12 proceed. 13 MS. HUSAIN: Okay. Any other 14 comments on energy use or is that it?

15 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: We're 16 behind. Do you feel like -- 17 MS. HUSAIN: The next is just

18 comments on them. 19 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: Maybe we've 20 addressed this one. Did we address this? 21 Yes, I think so. 22 How are you all doing? We haven't

### 202-234-4433 Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Page 223 1 got that many slides left. Do you want to 2 take just a quick break? Let's just take ten 3 minutes and then let's come back and finish 4 up. Okay?

5 MS. HUSAIN: Sure. 6 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: So wear your 7 badge in the building please and just get up

8 and move around. And then we'll resume. It 9 will be ten minutes after 2:00 p.m. by my 10 watch. We haven't got that much more to go I 11 think. Off the record. 12 (Whereupon, a short recess was 13 taken.)

14 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: On the 15 record. Okay. We're going resume picking up 16 where we left off. This is life cycle cost 17 and payback period analysis. And we're 18 returning to Aisha. 19 MS. HUSAIN: Okay. So the LCC 20 analysis determines the impact of the energy 21 conservation standards on consumers under 22 several scenarios such as new construction,

### 202-234-4433 Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Page 224 1 replacement and renovation. The LCC has two 2 components. One is the first cost which is 3 the consumer price plus the installation cost. 4 And the second is the operating cost. 5 The analysis period for LCC is 6 generally the baseline lamp life divided by 7 the average operating hours. When appropriate 8 DOE calculates residual value for the 9 remaining useful life of the lamp at the end 10 of the analysis period. 11 Through this method, DOE will 12 calculate the total life cycle cost for each 13 standard level. And results will be expressed 14 as LCC savings. That is the baseline LCC 15 minus the standard level LCC. DOE also plans 16 to calculate and report on the simple payback 17 period. 18 Now we will go into more detail 19 regarding the first cost and total operating 20 costs. The first cost comprises of the 21 purchase price and installation cost. The 22 purchase price is made up of the product price

### 202-234-4433 Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Page 225 1 and sales tax. DOE may use different prices 2 for commercial and residential sectors. 3 Installation cost is the product of 4 the average labor cost and the time needed to 5 install the lamp. DOE plans to calculate the 6 installation cost for the commercial sector, 7 but plans to assume no installation cost for 8 the residential sector. DOE also plans to 9 use the RS means, electrical cost data and 10 data from the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics 11 to estimate installation costs. 12 The second main input to the LCC is 13 total operating cost which comprises of 14 electricity consumption and the electricity 15 cost. Consumption is based on lamp wattage 16 and operating hours as determined in the 17 energy use analysis. Electricity cost 18 consists of the electricity price and 19 projected electricity price trends. 20 DOE is planning to derive energy 21 price trends using the Energy Information 22 Administration's Form 861 which collects

### 202-234-4433 Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Page 226 1 electric utility data annually and also use 2 the EIA's Annual Energy Outlook for 3 projections of future average electricity 4 prices. 5 DOE will also use a discount rate 6 to calculate the present value of any cash 7 flows over the analysis period. The discount 8 rate is calculated separately for the 9 residential, industrial and commercial 10 sectors. The discount rate will be the 11 estimate of interest or finance cost. And the 12 finance cost of raising funds can be financial 13 cost of any debt incurred to purchase a 14 product as well as the opportunity cost of any 15 equity used to purchase a product. 16 DOE welcomes comments on this 17 methodology for determining LCC and payback 18 period. 19 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: Both life 20 cycle costs and payback period analysis. 21 Keith. 22 MR. COOKE: We have no real issue

### 202-234-4433 Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Page 227 1 with this approach. 2 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: Okay.

3 Susan. 4 MS. ANDERSON: I guess the one 5 concern is you don't know yet what the new 6 products that meet the last set of standards 7 are going to cost yet. You're going to have 8 to wait on that. 9 And Steve Rosenstock is in the 10 room. And his group is an excellent source of 11 information about utility rates.

12 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: Great.

13 MS. ANDERSON: So for an alternate

14 source. 15 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: Yes, Steve. 16 She's queued you up. 17 MR. ROSENSTOCK: Thank you for that 18 plug. But I know that DOE has done this 19 before. I think the one issue especially with 20 the -- It looks like you're using 2009 data. 21 By early next year the 2010 data should be 22 available as well as AEO 2012 to use in terms

### 202-234-4433 Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Page 228 1 of trying to get the most recent prices out 2 there as well as projections. 3 I think especially on electric cost 4 there's going to be a couple wild cards based 5 on some EPA decisions. Because I think based 6 on some of the announcements already by some 7 of the utilities, there's going to be a big 8 change in the generation portfolio over the 9 next several years that's going to have an 10 impact on electricity prices in the U.S. both 11 in terms of coal generation as well as 12 renewables I think. So I think that's one 13 thing to consider is that you might need 14 another scenario, not just reference, high/low 15 scenarios which are really economic growth, 16 but reference high and not as high 17 environmental standards that could have a 18 significant impact in terms of some of the 19 prices that are going to be out there. 20 Thank you. 21 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: Okay. Thank 22 you.

### 202-234-4433 Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Page 229 1 Charlie. 2 MR. STEPHENS: Speaking to, when 3 you get into discount rates and finance costs, 4 I can understand how you'd want to apply that 5 in cases like an air conditioning system or a 6 boiler or something like that. But in the 7 purchase of light bulbs, I'm really having a 8 little trouble with using any kind of finance 9 cost here to purchase these products. 10 If you were talking a fixture or 11 multiple fixtures, I could see that. Put it 12 on a credit card or whatever. But you know I 13 don't know anybody who buys light bulbs other 14 than with cash or a debit card. And I'm just 15 having trouble applying that concept to a 16 product that, you know, to a lamp or even a 17 little package of lamps. I think you really 18 need to take another look at that part of the 19 analysis for this particular product type. 20 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: Susan first. 21 MS. ANDERSON: I was just going to 22 say that I think where it's coming into play

### 202-234-4433 Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Page 230 1 there if people are going to have to remove 2 T12 fixtures and put in T8. That's where I 3 certainly see it coming into play as opposed 4 to just replacing a lightbulb. 5 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: They're not 6 replacing one typically. 7 MS. ANDERSON: Right. 8 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: Right. It's 9 a series of them.

10 Steve. 11 MR. ROSENSTOCK: I think it's some 12 of this --

13 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: Susan wasn't 14 finished. 15 MR. ROSENSTOCK: I'm sorry. 16 MS. ANDERSON: And the other thing 17 when you're doing commercial and industrial 18 are you also going to include disposal costs? 19 MS. GUPTA: Yes. I think in the 20 last rulemaking we did consider some disposal 21 cost for fluorescent lighting. 22 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: Okay.

### 202-234-4433 Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Page 231 1 Thanks Mimi.

2 Steve.

3 MR. ROSENSTOCK: Steve Rosenstock. 4 I'll kind of follow up on what Charlie says. 5 I know I buy light bulbs with my credit card 6 because it's a rewards card. But I think 7 there is data out there whether it's from 8 whether it's from -- 9 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: But you pay 10 it off every month, don't you? 11 MR. ROSENSTOCK: Of course. So you 12 know what my interest rate is. So I think 13 there is information out there either from 14 banking associations or retail associations in 15 terms of -- and maybe from especially what may 16 be hardware stores where everyone is selling 17 all the light bulbs -- but in terms of just 18 percentage of purchase, cash, credit, debit. 19 And that might be a nice way to help with the 20 analysis is obviously debit. 21 There is no interest rate, but 22 things are totally chaotic now with certain

### 202-234-4433 Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Page 232 1 new Federal rules. So that might also help in 2 some of this analysis in terms of percentage 3 based on actual credit card versus debit 4 versus cash/check. 5 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: Yes, Tina. 6 DR. KAARSBERG: I myself asked the 7 same question about whether or not it was 8 appropriate to consider debt equity ratios 9 when purchasing a light bulb. However, I 10 guess there is a need to have a standard 11 approach throughout all of our rulemakings. 12 And when we consider a class we're always 13 considering a class versus something else. I 14 think that's part of the answer to why it's 15 that way. 16 But I would -- If you all have a 17 better suggestion of how we might want to 18 approach this, I would encourage you to offer 19 suggestions. Now is an excellent time to do 20 so. But I think in the absence of such 21 suggestions we'll probably stick with the 22 overall appliance standards procedure.

### 202-234-4433 Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Page 233 1 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: Charlie. 2 MR. STEPHENS: I think you really 3 need to adjust it to the product at hand quite 4 frankly. But my opportunity cost, I know 5 that's in there as an alternative and I know 6 my opportunity cost right now is what about 7 0.5 percent or 0.4 percent if I actually save 8 the money. It's very low right now. 9 And so I'm not saying you should 10 use zero. But I'm saying that the numbers 11 should probably be pretty low compared to what 12 it would be for the purchase of large capital 13 equipment. This is not capital equipment. 14 This is the kind of thing that's expensed on 15 almost everybody's. You know, in a business 16 sense, it's expensed. It's not a capital 17 expenditure. 18 Now I will make an allowance for 19 multiple fixture replacement. I can see where 20 that instance would have maybe a credit card 21 rate applied to it. I'm not saying you 22 shouldn't do that in those cases. But in

### 202-234-4433 Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Page 234 1 other cases where it really is lamp purchase 2 I'm suggesting that you really need to tailor 3 this to the product at hand or your analysis 4 is not real. 5 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: Okay. So 6 moving on to the shipment analysis and 7 National Impact Analysis. 8 MS. HUSAIN: The purpose of the 9 shipment analysis is to estimate the shipments 10 of lamps being considered in this rulemaking 11 and the product mix of the stock over the 12 analysis period in the base case and the 13 standards cases. The National Impact Analysis 14 uses the shipment and stock estimates to 15 determine national energy savings and net 16 present value at various standards. The 17 analysis period for the shipment and NIA will 18 be over 30 years starting from 2017 to 2046. 19 To determine lamp shipments, DOE 20 plans to use the methodology used in the 2009 21 Lamps Rule. DOE plans to use NEMA data and 22 any other data that becomes available to

### 202-234-4433 Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Page 235 1 determine distribution of shipments among 2 product classes and forecasts for installed

3 stock. 4 We will then develop shipment 5 forecasts by applying growth emerging 6 technologies and shipment assumptions and 7 determining the percentage of market share of 8 each lamp type by taking into account 9 efficacy, power rating, light output and 10 lifetime of the lamp and lamp ballast systems. 11 Now we will go into the 12 calculations for the national energy savings 13 and net present values.

14 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: We have a 15 question here.

16 Steve. 17 MR. ROSENSTOCK: Steven Rosenstock, 18 EEI. It's actually on the shipments one. I 19 wonder if in this case again -- and 20 unfortunately it's too early to kind of see if 21 there's going to be any sort of possible 22 substitution effect. Because again, depending

### 202-234-4433 Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Page 236 1 on the price increase for some of the 2 incandescent reflector lamps -- I'll just talk 3 to those in particular -- some people might 4 switch over to compact fluorescent floods even 5 if they don't do the same utility just because 6 of the price impact. 7 And the other reason I would say 8 that is I just know based on what happened 9 with the central air conditioning shipments 10 and heat pumps after the 2006 Rule when 10 to 11 13 (Inaudible) The shipment forecast was much 12 higher than what actually happened which was 13 people just delayed or just -- Of course, it 14 was a part of the economy, but shipments went 15 down like 20 percent and no one had projected 16 that. So that would have a huge impact. 17 So I think with these products 18 again I would especially say for the 19 residential and maybe for the -- especially 20 for the residential sector I don't know. They 21 might want to look at a sensitivity analysis 22 for just substitution based on price impacts,

### 202-234-4433 Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Page 237 1 initial price impacts, if that's possible. 2 Thank you.

3 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: Thanks. 4 So let's keep going with this 5 slide. 6 MS. HUSAIN: Okay. The National 7 Energy Savings is the difference in the annual 8 energy consumption between the base case and 9 the standards case. The inputs are listed 10 here, installed stock, unit annual energy 11 consumption, electricity site-to-source 12 conversion factors which are calculated using 13 the annual energy outlook, the rebound rate 14 for which DOE plans to use one percent for the 15 commercial and industrial sectors and 8.5 16 percent in the residential sectors. 17 For the net present value, this is 18 the operating cost savings minus the increase 19 total installed cost at present value. For 20 these the inputs are shipments, per unit 21 installed cost, electricity prices and also it 22 would be applying two different discount rates

### 202-234-4433 Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Page 238 1 as directed by OMB guidelines.

2 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: And before 3 you go on would you just describe what rebound 4 rate is. 5 MS. HUSAIN: Sure. In general 6 terms, rebound rate is defined when cost 7 savings from energy savings lead to certain 8 consumer responses that might lead to greater 9 usage of the product and thereby may diminish 10 some of the benefits of the energy saving 11 improvements. 12 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: Okay. Thank 13 you.

14 Steve Rosenstock. 15 MR. ROSENSTOCK: Steve Rosenstock, 16 EEI. A couple of things. In terms of the 17 rebound rate, is that based on other lighting 18 surveys or lighting studies done. Well, 19 especially for the commercial/industrial 20 sector, I just kind of don't know if there's 21 any real rebound rate just because when -- At 22 least the commercial customers I've worked

### 202-234-4433 Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Page 239 1 with, they put in the new products to save 2 money. And the only time they'll change the 3 hours is if the hours of the operation 4 actually change because of business purposes

5 not because of the new standard. 6 And residential sector that's an 7 interesting number. But again I'm wondering 8 if both are a little too high. And I'm just 9 wondering if there are studies out there fine. 10 I'm just kind of curious where the numbers

11 came from.

12 MS. HUSAIN: So these numbers are 13 based on a survey of literature that quoted 14 about four reports I think. And it's 15 referenced in the framework document. 16 MR. ROSENSTOCK: Okay. 17 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: Charlie. 18 MR. STEPHENS: Charlie Stephens. 19 Yes, I did look at your quoted references and 20 I'm not sure they're applicable here. I kind

21 of second Steve's concerns that the number of 22 the residential rate anyway is a little high.

### 202-234-4433 Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Page 240 1 If there is a rebound rate, I'm not sure I 2 would necessarily attribute it to the more 3 efficient technology. 4 I notice we're down at 0.4 watts a 5 square foot in our offices. And I know 6 there's been a little bit of rebound there. 7 But it's more a lack of awareness of what's 8 happening with the control system I think at 9 various times than the fact that everything is 10 efficient. We'll just leave them on more. 11 So I think they need to be looked 12 at. And I think you just need to be sure that 13 whatever rates you're choosing are really 14 applicable to lighting in both sectors. I 15 mean I'm okay with what you come up with as I 16 think the effect might actually exist. But 17 I'm not convinced it's 8.5 percent in the 18 residential sector. 19 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: Any 20 additional resources, Charlie? 21 MR. STEPHENS: We might have. I'd 22 have to go back and look. I think we've done

### 202-234-4433 Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Page 241 1 some work in this area. But again I don't 2 know that it's relevant to lighting either. 3 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: Yes. Okay.

4 Steve. 5 MR. ROSENSTOCK: Steve Rosenstock, 6 EEI. Also as a follow-on especially in 7 commercial buildings especially with building 8 codes requiring more and more lighting, 9 automated lighting controls, I think that will 10 also suppress some of the rebound rate as 11 well. Again that's just based on codes and 12 standards, not necessarily operational. But 13 again there are more mandates for more 14 controls especially commercial/industrial 15 buildings. So that's going to suppress any 16 rebound. Again, my personal view. 17 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: Okay. 18 MR. ROSENSTOCK: And second point 19 is on the site-to-source conversion factors, I 20 think there should be a sensitivity analysis 21 again based on what's happening with EPA 22 rulemakings because I have seen some -- There

### 202-234-4433 Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Page 242 1 have been a lot of press announcements about 2 the older coal-fired plants being retired or 3 just being refueled with natural gas or being 4 replaced with biomass or some renewals. And I 5 believe some of these numbers could go down 6 quite significantly compared to the AEO 2011 7 projections. Thank you.

8 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: Pekka.

9 DR. HAKKARAINEN: Pekka 10 Hakkarainen. I guess I can't help myself. I 11 know you are required to project to 2046. But 12 it's like projecting the path of a hurricane 13 that hasn't even started yet.

14 Please don't use more than one 15 significant figure in any numerical estimates. 16 Even that is likely to be wrong. 17 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: Okay. Thank 18 you.

19 You can see the comment boxes 20 listed there in 21 and 22. Take a peek. See 21 if there is anything else that you wish to

22 address on those comment boxes.

### 202-234-4433 Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Page 243 1 Keith. 2 MR. COOKE: Yes, we're a little bit 3 concerned about how we're going to project the 4 future sales because we're already starting to 5 see a negative impact from rising prices. 6 With the new rule kicking in next year, we 7 can't tell what's going to happen to the sales

8 after that. 9 We're already seeing delays today 10 from the impact of the rare earth price 11 increases. Now we're going to exacerbate it 12 even further with the existing rule kicking 13 in. We're concerned about what's going to 14 happen with the incandescent reflectors also 15 having to go to the HIR technologies. That's 16 going to drive prices up.

17 As a result for the comment 22 I 18 think it is in particular we're very concerned 19 about what's going to happen to the paybacks

20 and ROIs. 21 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: Okay. 22 MS. GUPTA: Doug, can I ask a

### 202-234-4433 Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Page 244 1 question? 2 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: Please, 3 Mimi. 4 MS. GUPTA: Mimi Gupta. So, Keith, 5 when you said you'd seen a significant 6 decrease in your sales due to the price 7 increases, the recent price increases, where

8 are those consumers? What are those consumers 9 purchasing? Are they just living in the dark? 10 MR. COOKE: They're delaying 11 purchases. 12 MS. GUPTA: Oh, delaying purchases. 13 So like for new construction or? 14 MR. COOKE: New construction, the 15 whole market is already in the dumps. 16 MS. GUPTA: Or for renovation or? 17 Right. Right. 18 MR. COOKE: But even for retrofit 19 business. 20 MS. GUPTA: I see. Okay. 21 MR. COOKE: We're seeing a lot of 22 delay.

### 202-234-4433 Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Page 245 1 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: Existing 2 users are delaying upgrades essentially.

3 MR. COOKE: Yes. 4 MS. ANDERSON: As I said earlier, 5 we got calls from the utility companies 6 because they were already seeing the impact. 7 They couldn't get the paybacks and the ROIs 8 that their customers demanded to justify going 9 forward even with their incentive programs. 10 MR. COOKE: What we're having to do 11 just so you're aware of it is get very, very 12 creative on including not just a lamp-for-lamp 13 replacement like we've done in the past, but 14 it has to be a complete system where we're 15 going and doing all the controls and 16 everything else in order to get a sale. We're 17 having to provide financing ourselves in order 18 to make these things work now. I mean these 19 are dire straits.

20 DR. KAARSBERG: Can I? 21 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: Tina. 22 DR. KAARSBERG: This is Tina. If I

### 202-234-4433 Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Page 246 1 could follow up. Are there any like areas 2 where you are seeing increases or slower drops 3 than you might have otherwise expected? I'm 4 sort of jokingly thinking of how instead of 5 changing the light bulbs in the basement I now 6 go down there with my LED headlamp. But 7 that's more of a labor issue than a light bulb 8 price issue for me. 9 But anyway I'm just curious. Are 10 there any kind of anomalies in the data that 11 indicate some kind of substitution going on? 12 MR. COOKE: Not for, I would say, 13 general traditional tungsten filament type 14 lamps. But you're right. On the LEDs there 15 are some huge drops happening. Whether or not 16 they're going to get down to the $10 range I 17 don't see that in the near future. But I do 18 see it eventually happening. 19 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: Okay. Take 20 a peak at 21 and 22. Other comments on those 21 requests which has been addressed once? 22 (No verbal response.)

### 202-234-4433 Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Page 247 1 Okay. Then the next slide is 2 23/24. As you can see data sources that 3 anticipate using as inputs. They've touched 4 on data sources. Some of you are going to

5 look for that. 6 And comments on quantitative and 7 theoretical underpinnings of the rebound 8 effect as well as results of newer studies on 9 size and sign of the rebound effect, 10 residential, commercial and industrial, for 11 consumers? Anything additional on those? 12 Nothing additional? 13 (No verbal response.) 14 Okay. But then the comment boxes 15 continue.

16 MS. HUSAIN: Yes.

17 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: I have 25 18 and 26. Take a peek at those. 19 (Off the record comment.) 20 Nothing on that at this time. 21 Okay. So then we're onto the final topic. 22 MS. HUSAIN: Okay. So I'll just

### 202-234-4433 Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Page 248 1 briefly discuss some of the other analyses 2 that DOE plans on conducting in the NOPR stage 3 of the rulemaking. And we'll start with the 4 manufacturer impact analysis.

5 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: Pardon me. 6 Mike has a question or a comment. 7 MR. McGARAGHAN: Sorry. I thought 8 I missed my chance. This is what I was 9 waiting for. Go ahead. 10 MS. HUSAIN: Okay. So the purpose 11 of the manufacturer impact analysis is to 12 assess the impacts of standards on the 13 manufacturers to identify and estimate impacts 14 on manufacturer subgroups that may be more 15 severely affected than the industry as a whole 16 and to examine direct employment impacts, 17 manufacturing capacity and regulatory impact 18 on the industry. 19 DOE plans to do this using the 20 Government Regulatory Impact Model or GRIM to 21 analyze industry, cash flow and industry net 22 present value. DOE also plans to interview

### 202-234-4433 Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Page 249 1 manufacturers. 2 On this slide, we're just showing 3 the three phases of the manufacturer impact 4 analysis. In phase one, DOE will create an 5 industry profile and will conduct this first 6 phase in the preliminary analysis using 7 publicly available financial information and 8 preliminary manufacturer interviews. And in 9 phase two, DOE will prepare an industry cash 10 flow model and an interview questionnaire for 11 manufacturers. In phase three, DOE will 12 interview manufacturers and assess the impacts 13 of standards both quantitatively and 14 qualitatively. DOE will conduct the second 15 two phases in the NOPR stage.

16 We welcome comments on the 17 manufacturer impact analysis.

18 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: Susan.

19 MS. ANDERSON: The one comment that 20 we had for this was the fact that the 21 fluorescent prices are so volatile at this 22 time. And literally I mean we've notified our

### 202-234-4433 Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Page 250 1 customers in writing to expect month-by-month 2 price increases. And when it comes to IRL 3 those product lines aren't finalized yet. 4 DR. HAKKARAINEN: What are you 5 going to get?

6 MS. ANDERSON: Yes. We don't have 7 any data yet. 8 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: Okay. Thank 9 you. 10 Charlie. 11 MR. STEPHENS: I just had one 12 question. When you're dealing with an 13 industry where they manufacture a lot of the - 14 - you know, such a broad cross section of 15 product and there is essentially some 16 substitution that might go on, it frequently 17 is a substitution within the industry from one 18 -- same company, but a different type of 19 product, a different technology or whatever. 20 Say solid state lighting. Somebody shifts 21 from fluorescent to solid state. 22 The company will have different

### 202-234-4433 Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Page 251 1 cash flow one way or another when that 2 happens. But the question is how does your 3 analysis account for those shifts that are 4 kind of internal to the company in question on 5 aggregate. 6 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: Tina.

7 DR. KAARSBERG: I confess. I am 8 not really familiar with the GRIM model. But 9 I can tell you that manufacturing impact 10 analysis comprises two parts. One is the GRIM 11 model and how we represent that. 12 But the other is the sort of more 13 qualitative. And if we're dealing with 14 something that we are unable to represent in 15 the GRIM it would definitely be represented or 16 would appear and be discussed as part of the 17 qualitative part. So we definitely would 18 capture that. We just might not be able to 19 analyze it the same way. 20 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: Mike. 21 MR. McGARAGHAN: Mike McGaraghan, 22 California IOUs. I would echo Charlie's

### 202-234-4433 Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Page 252 1 comments and just add that in the last round 2 of standards DOE did draw a box around just 3 the IRL product class and the impacts on 4 shipments and just the GSFL product class. 5 And I completely agree with Charlie that there 6 is a lot of shifting going on. In fact, DOE 7 models a shift scenario and where they do put 8 estimates on the amount of shipments that 9 shift to higher efficiency products. 10 So I think it's really important to 11 capture those impacts. And EPCA (phonetic) 12 says and I'll read here that "DOE needs to 13 capture the economic impact of the standard on 14 the manufacturers of the products subject to 15 such standard." So in this case we're mostly 16 talking about GE, Phillips and Sylvania and a

17 handful of others.

18 But those three manufacturers are 19 also making solid state lighting. So to 20 disregard the fact that they're seeing 21 increases in sales there I think is an 22 oversight. And it's kind of a double whammy

### 202-234-4433 Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Page 253 1 because on the one hand if we just look at 2 their shrinking sales that's one sort of loss

3 of revenue for the manufacturers. 4 The other more important one is the 5 issue of mark-ups. We played with the GRIM 6 model last time to see what was the -- how big 7 of an impact the assumed mark-up had. And 8 it's huge. It really skews the numbers if you 9 assume margins can be maintained or margins 10 can't be maintained. And solid state lighting 11 is exactly where those mark-ups are now 12 happening in a product that's not defined in 13 this product class. 14 So, sure, if you look just at these 15 products, it's harder to maintain margins as 16 standards get tougher. But as standards shift 17 more products to or more purchases to solid 18 state, that's really where the new margins 19 are. I think it's important for DOE to 20 broaden the way it draws that scope a little 21 bit.

22 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: Steve

### 202-234-4433 Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Page 254 1 Rosenstock. 2 MR. ROSENSTOCK: Steve Rosenstock, 3 EEI. There could be the compact fluorescent 4 substitution as well for some of these 5 products. And as we know there is no domestic 6 manufacturers of compact fluorescent 7 technology as far as I know or at least large

8 scale that I'm aware of. 9 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: Charlie. 10 MR. STEPHENS: I would just be 11 careful about that. All of the ones I buy 12 have the name from one of the big three, two 13 of whom are sitting in the room here, on them. 14 So they may not manufacture them themselves

15 but. 16 MR. ROSENSTOCK: Well, this is a 17 major margin impact.

18 MR. STEPHENS: Well no. I'm 19 talking about industry cash flow and profit. 20 MR. ROSENSTOCK: Right. Well, one 21 thing I was going to say in terms of this 22 model is if it's possible it would be

### 202-234-4433 Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Page 255 1 interesting to see if there could be some 2 modeling of impact of domestic versus overseas 3 type of job shifts because that's a little bit 4 of an issue in Washington, D.C. these days. 5 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: Okay. 6 MR. ROSENSTOCK: Thank you. 7 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: Susan, do 8 you want to comment?

9 MS. ANDERSON: No. 10 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: Okay. Tim. 11 MR. BALLO: Tim Ballo, 12 Earthjustice. Just to follow on to Mike's 13 point and I think to a point that I think Tina 14 raised. There is these qualitative factors 15 that are considered in the MIA and one of them 16 is cumulative regulatory burden which is sort 17 of the impact on the manufacturer of a 18 fluorescent lamp by virtue of the fact that 19 there are also regulations for GSILs or HID 20 lamps, anything. 21 So it's sort of logically 22 inconsistent to consider the impact of

### 202-234-4433 Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Page 256 1 regulations for those products but not to 2 consider any benefit for those products 3 manufactured by the same set of manufacturers 4 from these regulations. 5 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: Okay. 6 Steve, you weren't done. 7 (No verbal response.) 8 You're all set. Okay. Additional 9 comments on this? 10 (No verbal response.) 11 So then we're on -- Did you do the 12 preceding slide?

13 MS. HUSAIN: That was the comments 14 slide. 15 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: This Chevron 16 thing.

17 MS. HUSAIN: Yeah. 18 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: You did. 19 Okay. Then we're moving on to 28 and then 20 finally to the NOPR analyses. 21 MS. HUSAIN: Right. So this is a 22 list of some of the other analyses that DOE

### 202-234-4433 Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Page 257 1 will be conducting in the NOPR stage. There's 2 a life cycle cost subgroup analysis that looks 3 at effects on various national consumer 4 subgroups, the utility impact analysis which 5 looks at the impacts on the generation 6 capacity of utilities, the employment impact 7 analysis which looks at indirect impacts on 8 overall national employment. We'll also do an 9 environmental assessment and a regulatory 10 impact analysis. I haven't gone through these 11 in a lot of detail here, but more detail is 12 provided in the framework document. 13 The next set of slides sort of 14 touch on comments we're requesting for these 15 various analyses.

16 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: Steve

17 Rosenstock. 18 MR. ROSENSTOCK: Steve Rosenstock, 19 EEI. In terms of some of your environmental 20 analysis when I looked in the framework 21 document, the framework document did not even 22 mention the fact that EPA is coming out with

### 202-234-4433 Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Page 258 1 rules on CO emissions of generation plants.

2 2 The rule was delayed. It was supposed to be 3 announced last month or earlier. 4 But according to the EPA schedule 5 they're supposed to come out with proposed 6 rules this fall and a final rule next summer. 7 And it's not even mentioned in the framework 8 document which was really surprising to me. 9 And also there is going to be a 10 final rule on mercury and particulate matter 11 this fall. There has been changes in the 12 sulfur dioxide and NOx rule that was 13 announced. All of these are going to have 14 significant impacts in terms of racheting down 15 power plant emissions. 16 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: Betsy. 17 MS. KOHL: This is Betsy Kohl, DOE. 18 When EPA publishes something in the Federal 19 Register, a proposed rule or a final rule, we 20 can take a look at it. But until they do, we 21 have no basis to include it in our analysis. 22 MR. ROSENSTOCK: Steve Rosenstock,

### 202-234-4433 Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Page 259 1 EEI. I appreciate that. But it didn't even - 2 - I'm worried about the framework not 3 documenting, not even mentioning, the fact 4 that there's a proposed timetable that could 5 have an impact on the DOE analysis. And I 6 think that is -- 7 MS. KOHL: We don't have any basis 8 to know when EPA is going to do that. 9 MR. ROSENSTOCK: They publish it on 10 their website. 11 MS. KOHL: They have a timeline. 12 That may change. Until they publish something 13 in the Federal Register, we have no basis to 14 act on it. But when they do, we'll include it 15 in the analysis as we go along. 16 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: Charlie 17 Stephens. 18 MR. STEPHENS: My question was this 19 is a framework discussion and the question 20 here is do you have the ability in the way you 21 will do the analysis to include it if it 22 happens and when it happens.

### 202-234-4433 Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Page 260 1 MS. KOHL: When it happens, yes. 2 But the if is the problem. 3 MR. STEPHENS: Okay.

4 MS. KOHL: That's for DOE to see. 5 MR. STEPHENS: Okay. And if you 6 do, then some of us during the framework stage 7 might like to know how you could include it as 8 part of the discussion. 9 MS. KOHL: Until we know what they 10 do, we don't know how we would address it is 11 the problem. This is Betsy Kohl.

12 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: Steve. 13 MR. ROSENSTOCK: One item to 14 consider under what EPA announced is that they 15 said they were going to come out with a final 16 rule in July of 2012. That's published on 17 their website. I don't know why you're 18 laughing at me. But that is published on 19 their website. That's what EPA has announced.

20 That's a fact. 21 MS. KOHL: I'm not laughing at you. 22 But schedules change, all right, for a whole

### 202-234-4433 Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Page 261 1 host of reasons.

2 MR. ROSENSTOCK: I understand that. 3 MS. KOHL: So until they issue the 4 final rule we wouldn't have any basis to know 5 what they're even going to publish. Right?

6 MR. ROSENSTOCK: I understand. 7 MS. KOHL: We don't know what shape 8 the final rule is going to be in.

9 MR. ROSENSTOCK: I understand that 10 completely. But the fact is they publish it 11 on their website. It was a public 12 announcement. And the fact that this rule 13 could come out in July and that the 14 preliminary analysis would be coming out in 15 September, there could be a timing issue in 16 terms of some of the preliminary analysis. 17 That was my point I was about to get to. 18 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: So you can 19 see the list of the other NOPR analyses and 20 many of you, perhaps most of you, are quite 21 familiar with these. And you can see the 22 request for comment in items 27, 29 and 30 and

### 202-234-4433 Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Page 262 1 31 and 32 on the subsequent page. So any 2 additional comments on these at this time? 3 Tim Ballo. 4 MR. BALLO: Tim Ballo. Just one 5 quick follow-up to Steve's point. The 111 6 standards that he's talking about, greenhouse 7 gas standards for power plants, will have only 8 guidelines for existing power plants. So it's 9 going to be several years yet I think before 10 anybody knows how those guidelines will play

11 out. 12 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: Okay.

13 Pekka.

14 DR. HAKKARAINEN: Pekka 15 Hakkarainen. This is not really a direct 16 answer to any of the questions posed. But 17 since we are at the end, I'll just make the 18 comment that I would like to spend more of my 19 energy and I think I have some friends here 20 who feel likewise on real energy saving 21 opportunities in buildings and outside of 22 buildings and not focus so much on component

### 202-234-4433 Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Page 263 1 regulation at this point. It has diminishing

2 returns. 3 We have lots of opportunities in 4 our buildings. So I would appreciate very 5 much if we could have the time available to

6 focus on that. 7 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: Okay. Thank 8 you. And as you know there's another 9 opportunity for comment at the end of the day. 10 Let's do the next slide. 11 MS. HUSAIN: We're just skipping 12 that other slide in the packet. So this is 13 basically a slide that provides information on 14 submitting comments for the framework 15 document. And the comment period deadline is

16 October 31st. 17 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: Okay. So 18 I'm handing out the evaluation form. And 19 there is an opportunity now to comment, raise 20 additional issues, anything you think wasn't 21 covered sufficiently during the course of the 22 day. I see Pekka.

### 202-234-4433 Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Page 264 1 DR. HAKKARAINEN: Yes. I wanted to 2 answer Betsy's question earlier from this 3 morning regarding the comment period. We've 4 sort of conferred here and we would like to 5 request that both comment periods end at the

6 same November 28th date. 7 MS. KOHL: Thank you. It's Betsy. 8 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: Steve, you 9 have an additional comment. 10 MR. ROSENSTOCK: Steve Rosenstock, 11 EEI. I was just looking at the email address 12 on the slide versus the email address on the 13 Federal Register notice. Has that changed? 14 MS. HUSAIN: For which?

15 MR. ROSENSTOCK: One's for the test 16 procedure and one is for the -- I'm sorry. 17 MS. HUSAIN: I'm sorry. I was 18 flipping back and forth. This is for the test 19 procedure. 20 MR. ROSENSTOCK: Thank you very

21 much. 22 MS. HUSAIN: And this is for the

### 202-234-4433 Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Page 265 1 framework.

2 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: Thanks 3 Steve. It's a good spot. 4 Okay. So I've just handed out the 5 evaluation form. We're nearing the end of 6 this meeting. I don't wish to diminish 7 anyone's capacity to make a final comment or 8 raise any additional issues. 9 Tina? 10 DR. KAARSBERG: Well, if no one 11 else has a comment, I just want to comment 12 that I really thank you all for all of your 13 great comments. Sorry we couldn't answer 14 every single question you asked. But we will 15 try to do so in the future and you've given us 16 lots of things to consider and to work on. I 17 think it's been very constructive and I look 18 forward to continuing to work with you as we 19 go through this. 20 Again thanks for coming. And, 21 folks on the webinar, thanks for signing up. 22 And I hope this was useful for you as well.

### 202-234-4433 Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Page 266 1 Bye.

2 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: Thanks to 3 all of you. 4 Yes, Mike. 5 MR. McGARAGHAN: Just a procedural 6 question. Are the webinars -- You mentioned 7 earlier you didn't want people to -- You asked 8 people to mute their phones. Is there an 9 opportunity for people on the webinar to 10 actually speak in these meetings? Or will

11 there ever be? 12 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: Tina. 13 DR. KAARSBERG: Yes. This is Tina. 14 Our webinar approach is evolving. And in one 15 of the webinars we had before this one we 16 actually had someone who was one of the 17 presenters dial in over the webinar. And I 18 think right now we're saying if someone has 19 prearranged to speak then that's great. We'll

20 do that. 21 However, just from the logistics of 22 it, it's difficult -- we can't. It's a little

### 202-234-4433 Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Page 267 1 bit difficult to have people just chiming in 2 because there's not really quite yet the same 3 equivalent of sort of raising your hand right 4 now. Maybe there should be and the speaker 5 phone and having people forget to mute it and

6 whatever. 7 But if you think that we should 8 evolve towards that, that's something we'll 9 take into consideration. This is definitely a 10 record number of people we've had 11 participating.

12 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: Steve.

13 MR. ROSENSTOCK: If I could follow 14 on real quickly I believe you're using -- And 15 again it might be proprietary -- like 16 go2meeting type of software issue. 17 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: Today we 18 did. Yes. 19 MR. ROSENSTOCK: I believe one of 20 the things is people could raise their hands 21 in the right-hand corner. 22 PARTICIPANT: And it appears on the

### 202-234-4433 Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Page 268 1 screen? 2 MR. ROSENSTOCK: Yes, and it 3 appears on the screen.

4 PARTICIPANT: We use that. 5 MR. ROSENSTOCK: So again they 6 could unmute their phone to ask questions. So 7 I've been doing meetings like that for years.

8 FACILITATOR BROOKMAN: We've made a 9 start on it. We're trying to figure out ways 10 for individuals to get their comments or 11 questions into the record. So anyway it's 12 something -- There are some technical things 13 like -- There are some glitches to be worked 14 out. But appreciate the comment. 15 Okay. So thanks to all of you. 16 Safe travels. Appreciate your comments today.

17 Off the record. 18 (Whereupon, at 2:49 p.m., the 19 above-entitled matter was concluded.)

20

21

22

### 202-234-4433 Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Page 269

A abandoned74:8 ability 174:3

259:20 able 36:14 48:20

98:21 130:16 143:19 166:11 196:14 207:6 208:20 210:17 216:17 221:5 251:18 above-entitled

268:19 above-mentioned

79:15 absence 145:18

232:20 absolutely 119:20

219:22 absorption 127:13 AC 28:5,6 accelerated 41:9,10

41:16,20 42:8,18 47:10 66:2,7 accept49:18 58:16 acceptable 23:1

38:16 72:22 147:1 acceptance49:16 accepting 22:9,9 accomplished 115:11 account 129:2

235:8 251:3 accounts 207:7 accredit48:12 accreditation 34:6

34:18 35:11 accredited 34:4,11

35:21 38:17 48:16 48:18,19,20 accrediting 35:12 accredits 49:12 accuracy 20:8 accurate41:20

42:9 73:21 accurately 152:5 achieve 117:2 achieved 90:18 acknowledge70:21 act 18:6,11 19:1

88:10 259:14 actor's 76:12 actual 94:11 120:1 122:10 146:8 185:17 186:5 213:20 216:8 232:3 add 63:5 193:17 199:19 222:3 252:1 added 14:17 65:9

75:7 adding 199:13 addition74:17

91:15 188:19 205:10 additional 9:9 14:1 15:5,9 16:9 19:8 19:10 22:1 29:7 31:5,8 34:1 54:9 59:20 60:18 62:15 66:10 78:7 80:5 86:7,21 88:16 89:13 91:18,19 92:9 106:7,11 107:3 109:18 123:1,8 128:8 132:2 177:5 181:6 183:4 184:16 198:20 203:7 240:20 247:11,12 256:8 262:2 263:20 264:9 265:8 Additionally 39:21

42:7 51:22 additions 92:4 address 21:7 44:20

54:21,22 61:1 66:13 74:15 90:6 112:22 128:19 193:13 222:20 242:22 260:10 264:11,12 addressed 24:1 204:13 222:20 246:21 addresses 41:5 addressing 21:12 adds 25:18 27:8

28:9 adequate 189:12

211:8 adequately 74:15 adjust71:20 110:11 233:3 Administration's

225:22 admit206:22 adopt21:15 33:6

38:11 88:15 adopted 19:7 143:12 159:5 175:1 182:6,9 adopting 21:19 adoption 116:4 advance 15:2 advanced 194:12

203:20 advantageous

77:18 adverse 117:4,6 adversely 83:3 advisable 94:2 AEO 227:22 242:6 Affairs 5:17 affect 38:7 83:3

94:5 203:15 affiliation 5:14 agenda 8:8 9:16 17:15 67:8 ages 217:7 aggregate 251:5 aggregations 77:16 aggressive 75:6

77:16 aging76:3 ago 98:6 132:13 163:13 168:1,11 180:3,16,17 191:19 211:13 218:9 agree46:16 52:9

54:20 100:14 102:9 169:10 252:5 agreed 36:12 agreeing 169:8 agrees 160:7 ahead44:13 57:7

65:20 111:16 120:17 135:15 138:14 141:20 149:13 164:13 168:15 192:19,20 193:15 209:19 221:9 248:9 air 10:10 41:4

229:5 236:9 Aisha 1:21 3:10,13

7:8 87:18,19 142:8 198:22 206:4 223:18 alerted 206:22 Alex 1:17 5:16 45:1

53:21,22 56:10 64:9,10 65:20 68:16,16,17 96:1 96:11,12 99:17 103:10,11 113:10 113:11 114:15 128:15 171:21 191:21 193:17 200:9 206:22 208:10,11 209:19 209:20 219:4 align 27:14 28:17 aligning 38:9 Alliance 2:3 6:17 allocate 10:21 allow44:9,10,13

79:6 132:18 allowance46:1

233:18 allowed 66:2 allowing 80:9 allows41:16 45:9 alloys 136:18 alter42:6 alternate 227:13 alternative 63:16

65:12 233:5 aluminized 89:2 amateur 110:7 amazing 170:17 amend 20:4,6 amended 39:6

88:10,15 89:20 amending 91:16 amendments 20:9

20:13 31:22 32:4 88:17 AMERICA 1:1 American70:4 amount79:6 106:15 210:13 252:8 amounts 63:6 129:6 amplify 97:20 113:12 amplifying 103:13 analyses 3:15 9:6,7 116:8 139:18 205:5 210:19 248:1 256:20,22 257:15 261:19 analysis 3:10,12,15

3:15 8:17,22 9:6 53:6 54:11 55:11 58:11 62:4 69:19 71:17 73:3 74:2 76:20 77:7,18 79:16 85:11,14 86:1,18 88:4 89:17 90:6 103:18 116:11,17 117:8 117:10,13 118:6 129:18 137:11,14 139:4,14,15,20,21 140:2 146:8 147:16 148:21 152:3 154:8,12,15 154:15,18 173:11 178:4 182:13

### 202-234-4433 Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Page 270 193:1,5 195:4,21 196:19 197:1 200:13 203:13,15 204:19,20 205:12 206:9,11,18 208:6 208:7 209:13,14 209:22 212:16 215:1 223:17,20 224:5,10 225:17 226:7,20 229:19 231:20 232:2 234:3,6,7,9,12,13 234:17 236:21 241:20 248:4,11 249:4,6,17 251:3 251:10 257:2,4,7 257:10,20 258:21 259:5,15,21 261:14,16 analytical 184:1 analyze 140:21 145:22 153:8 248:21 251:19 analyzed 127:18 140:19 141:10 167:3 197:19,21 analyzing 143:20

208:1 Anderson 1:16 6:6

6:6 23:15,18,18 30:10 32:7,7 34:2 34:14,17 35:20 47:15 50:19 62:19 95:9 107:12 115:15 119:20 121:1,9,12 122:6 123:12 125:5,10 125:13 130:5 133:17 134:16 135:2,8,13,16 141:21 142:15 145:5,9,13 149:7 150:21 151:1 152:8 155:6,10 156:17,22 161:9 161:15,21 164:14 165:5,9 167:7,13 168:16,19 172:10 173:1 181:8 182:19 184:8,12 190:2 192:20 193:16 194:13,18 199:21 204:11 209:10 215:11,18 218:6 219:7 221:19 227:4,13 229:21 230:7,16 245:4 249:19 250:6 255:9 and/or 128:3 anecdotal 129:20 angle 32:14,16 108:15 109:8,8 110:11,16,17 112:3 149:17 angles 108:19 110:8 112:12 animal 123:17 announced 258:3

258:13 260:14,19 announcement 11:3 221:18 261:12 announcements

228:6 242:1 annual 51:5 60:2

212:19 226:2 237:7,10,13 annually 226:1 anomalies 246:10 ANSI 18:20 24:13

24:14 25:13,14 26:1 33:1 150:21 150:22 answer 142:8 184:18 197:11 210:10 220:3 232:14 262:16 264:2 265:13 anticipate 9:2 10:20 247:3 anti-backsliding 103:5 anybody7:13 68:15 78:16 229:13 262:10 anymore 167:5

200:12 anyone's 265:7 anyway 64:4

239:22 246:9 268:11 anyways 165:11 apologize4:21

68:20 171:4 Apparently 208:7 appear 13:18

251:16 appears 21:5

267:22 268:3 Appendix 25:5

26:5 31:16 applaud78:20 apples-to-apples

65:14 appliance 1:23 7:2

232:22 appliances 217:16 applicability 60:12 applicable 19:9 113:22 239:20 240:14 application 77:14 108:5,7,8,21 164:20 182:11 applications 77:11

91:12 92:21 99:1 108:18 120:20 164:18 221:2 applied 29:16 146:14 233:21 applies 132:15 apply 29:9 113:20 199:18 205:10 229:4 applying 229:15

235:5 237:22 appreciate4:19

85:6,7,12 86:5 107:10 175:19 259:1 263:4 268:14,16 approach45:15

69:18 76:17 146:3 179:8 204:22 227:1 232:11,18 266:14 approaching 194:17 appropriate49:4

78:1 86:17 102:16 109:13 123:19 143:22 196:22 200:11 201:2,4 224:7 232:8 approval44:9 Approved 39:16 approximately

70:15 92:8 134:17 April 89:19,22

93:12 103:14 apropos 111:15 arbitrary 57:2 arc 146:10 area 108:15 241:1 areas 108:17 109:1

246:1 argue 99:6 arguing79:1 argument55:5 ARPA-E 208:8 arrived 79:14 art 158:7 article 170:9 172:12 AR20 201:20 ASAP 190:22 asked 38:5 163:14

218:18 232:6 265:14 266:7 asking 78:15 asks 104:11 203:5 aspect22:11 aspects 20:20

203:12 assembly 121:13 assess 248:12

249:12 assessment 116:10 116:13 117:15 118:4 128:10 257:9 assessments 140:12 associated 69:19

75:14 79:22 153:11 174:2 183:12 association 1:18

5:19 70:1 210:17 associations 231:14

231:14 assume 222:9

225:7 253:9 assumed 175:14

215:5 253:7 assuming48:17

66:1 assumption 132:16 143:17 162:22 201:11 assumptions 54:16

73:4 162:6 235:6 assure 208:5 attempt 30:15 attention 76:20 114:2 attitude 78:9 attorney 59:1 attribute 240:2 audit 106:21 audits 106:18 August 89:18 auspices 64:4 authority 60:6

76:12 211:14 authorized 88:13 automated 241:9 automatically

222:9 automobiles 18:8 availability 72:7

73:5 78:11 79:9 103:3 117:5 127:7 193:4 210:3 available 9:21

### 202-234-4433 Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Page 271 26:12 34:6 72:12 73:13,15 86:11 116:21 143:18 160:9 168:3,6 179:19 180:16 181:1 188:14 189:11 201:15 205:8,9 215:14 217:10 227:22 234:22 249:7 263:5 Avenue 1:12 average 82:15 148:1 152:10 154:5 156:3,7,12 205:10 216:8 224:7 225:4 226:3 averaged 216:4 averaging 216:1 avoid 105:12 aware 31:19 220:10

245:11 254:8 awareness 1:23 7:3

240:7 A-F-T-E-R-N-O-... 138:21 a.m 1:13 4:2 68:7,8 138:17 B B 25:4 31:16 Baback 50:20 back 10:3 29:7 42:1

55:2 68:5,7,10,10 99:12 129:17 130:21 138:6,15 138:17 139:2 142:20 163:4 183:17 184:18 189:21 199:7 206:3 209:11 215:19 217:17 223:3 240:22 264:18 background 88:6 backlash 72:16 backlog 78:21 backsliding 133:1 backup 144:14 backwards 132:5 badge 67:20 138:9

223:7 ball 113:17 ballast25:22 26:15

27:2 29:12 33:13 54:14 55:3 81:18 82:4 115:22 117:11 118:19 140:10 173:22 235:10 ballasted 135:10 ballasts 26:11 Ballo 1:17 6:10,10

37:11,12 38:18 94:18,19,19 95:11 165:21,22,22 255:11,11 262:3,4 262:4 Baltimore4:11 banking 231:14 Barhydt58:22 base 95:12 104:11 106:14 148:20 181:10 234:12 237:8 based 22:22 40:8

46:12 55:4 58:1,7 61:10 70:4 73:22 74:1 90:22 91:20 92:5 99:22 107:22 108:10 116:18 119:5 124:7 127:12 132:16 140:10 141:2 143:17 147:16 148:2 149:1 152:3 152:9 156:18 160:11 170:6 172:19 174:1 175:6,17,18 177:17 178:3 182:15 183:14 185:17 186:10 187:12 195:2,21 201:10 213:10 214:21 216:8 225:15 228:4,5 232:3 236:8,22 238:17 239:13 241:11,21 baseline 79:21 84:6 105:18 117:10 140:5,13 141:12 141:13 147:5,8 149:11 154:10,14 160:10,13 162:6 162:17,22 163:14 163:16,20 165:19 166:3,15 167:5,20 169:7,9 173:9,14 173:21 176:14 178:15 185:10,16 214:8 224:6,14 baselines 143:16,20 144:6 159:3 163:10 185:7 basement246:5 bases 92:16 119:21 basic 25:1 53:2 basically 35:17

45:14 48:8,9 81:2 84:21 154:8 263:13 basis 12:5 41:1

51:5 99:5 258:21 259:7,13 261:4 beam 22:20 32:14

32:14,15,16,18,21 32:22 109:7,7 110:11,16,17 112:3 bear 52:5 72:15

75:5 208:18 bearing 209:1 bears 56:7 beat 138:2 190:17 beats 190:14 becoming71:16 beep 11:21,21,21 11:21 began 98:6 beginning70:14 71:10 73:2 79:4 170:20 behalf 1:19 2:1

6:19 125:2 218:8 believe 15:11 30:21

33:13 51:2 59:15 60:11 62:2 64:3 92:6 109:13 111:18 160:10 202:12 209:10 215:22 242:5 267:14,19 believes 51:18 140:6 141:14 143:14 believing 111:12 belle 113:17 bench 181:19 beneath 68:3 beneficial 176:18 benefit99:7 208:13

256:2 benefits 38:9

238:10 best 10:1 14:3

20:12 31:20 194:9 211:18 213:20 bet 64:11 Betsy 1:22 7:10 12:19,21 13:21,22 14:10 17:8 58:18 58:19 95:5,6 104:21,22 258:16 258:17 260:11 264:7 Betsy's 264:2 better 30:22 33:21

38:10 65:15 108:3 113:16 122:9 130:10 146:9 190:13 219:5,6,7 232:17 betting 131:20 beyond 60:1,5 64:3

96:5 109:20 180:21 191:18 big 68:19 85:19 132:22 133:1 138:7 178:4 179:21 213:8 228:7 253:6 254:12 biomass 242:4 bipin 146:16 148:4 163:21 174:12 198:8 bit 30:14 38:4 75:2

84:22 107:17 112:21 162:14 169:19 188:3 213:15 220:5 240:6 243:2 253:21 255:3 267:1 biz 117:20 bi-pin 25:21 83:22

84:6 blah 53:3,3,4 blue 205:2,7 blurring 112:10 bodies 35:11 body 56:13 Boesenberg 1:17

5:16,17 45:1,2 53:22,22 54:7 56:10,10,19,22 64:10,11,14 68:17 68:18 96:12,12 103:11,11 113:11 113:11 114:15,15 126:10 171:21,21 191:22 192:11 208:11,11 209:20 209:20 boiler 229:6 book 205:2,7 books 53:3 bore 55:5 bottom 184:13 box 24:3 203:4

252:2 boxes 61:20 242:19

242:22 247:14

### 202-234-4433 Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Page 272 BPAR92:15 BPARs 110:9 BR 88:22 92:15 106:3 break 3:6 8:1,18

9:1,4 67:7,16 86:22 137:15 220:4 223:2 Brenda7:13,14 brief7:18 8:9 12:7

40:17 88:5 briefly 248:1 bright 119:16 bring 218:7 brings 147:14 broad 250:14 broaden 253:20 broadly 22:14 Brookman 1:13,15

3:4 4:3,10 5:11,20 6:5 7:12,15 10:17 11:4 12:6,19 13:3 13:21 14:6 15:4,8 17:8,13 21:1 22:1 22:4 23:17,22 24:6 29:3 30:8 31:1,3,7 33:3,10 33:22 34:9,12,15 35:1,6,9,16 36:4 37:10,22 38:21 39:2 42:12 43:7 44:6,15,19,22 45:11,16,19 46:18 46:21 47:14,19 48:2,7 49:9 50:7,9 50:14,17,21 51:7 51:10 52:4 53:11 53:17,21 54:6 55:16 57:3,7,10 58:18 59:7,19 60:13,17,21 61:19 62:18 63:1,10,14 64:5,13 65:4,17 66:4,9,12,16,19 67:6 68:9 80:4 86:6,20 87:15 93:17 94:18 95:5 95:22 96:11 99:10 100:3 102:18 103:10 104:8,14 104:21 105:22 106:6 107:4,11,13 107:17 109:4,22 111:9 112:17 113:3,10 115:13 115:20 116:5 117:19,22 119:19 120:11,16 121:17 122:5,14,18 123:3 123:11,20 124:13 124:22 125:4,7,12 125:16,21 126:11 128:14,21 130:4 131:14 132:1 133:3,12,15 134:9 135:4,14,21 136:6 136:9 137:1,8,17 138:1 139:1,6,8 141:19 142:3,7 143:1,5 144:1,8 144:16 145:2 146:4 147:2 149:5 149:13 150:12 151:5 152:12,15 153:22 156:3,7 157:1 158:2,13 159:17 161:14,20 162:2 163:11 164:12 165:7,10 165:20 166:7,16 167:6,15 168:14 169:12,21 170:22 172:9,21 173:2 175:11 177:4 178:8,22 179:3 181:5,22 182:18 183:3 184:6,15,19 184:22 185:12,18 187:1,7 189:14 191:21 192:8,16 193:11 194:4,19 197:5,7,10,15 198:19 199:15 200:4,14 201:5 203:3,16 204:10 204:16 205:18 208:10 209:9,17 210:22 213:1 215:10 216:10 217:12 218:4 219:15 220:7 221:8 222:2,11,15 222:19 223:6,14 226:19 227:2,12 227:15 228:21 229:20 230:5,8,13 230:22 231:9 232:5 233:1 234:5 235:14 237:3 238:2,12 239:17 240:19 241:3,17 242:8,17 243:21 244:2 245:1,21 246:19 247:17 248:5 249:18 250:8 251:6,20 253:22 254:9 255:5,7,10 256:5 256:15,18 257:16 258:16 259:16 260:12 261:18 262:12 263:7,17 264:8 265:2 266:2 266:12 267:12,17 268:8 building4:9 67:14

67:21,22 106:18 106:21 138:4,6 223:7 241:7 buildings 219:6,7

220:21 241:7,15 262:21,22 263:4 built 198:22 bulb 89:3 92:16

215:6 232:9 246:7 bulbs 229:7,13

231:5,17 246:5 bulge 201:17 bulged 88:22 89:1

201:17 bulk77:5 209:3 bullet91:14 93:2 200:19 212:22 bunch 202:6 burden 20:9 26:8

27:18 28:21 51:6 60:2 62:17 63:18 74:18 75:6,7 255:16 burdens 203:14 Bureau 225:10 burner201:12,16

201:18,22 business 72:20 172:13 210:4 233:15 239:4 244:19 busy 8:20 buy 231:5 254:11 buying 153:8 buys 229:13 Bye 266:1 C C 122:7,11,12 cafeteria 8:20 138:7,7 calculate 224:12,16

225:5 226:6 calculated 160:22

212:14 226:8 237:12 calculates 224:8 calculation 53:8 122:12 calculations 235:12 California 2:2 6:20

6:22 21:4 121:20 126:3 162:5 179:7 216:18 218:21 222:5 251:22 call 5:3 54:10 188:16 197:12 218:8 called 20:22 32:18

98:2 117:8 calling 11:15 179:9 calls 130:14 245:5 campaign 111:1 candela 111:4 candlepower 32:14

32:15,17 109:7 110:17 capable 35:4 capacity 118:7

248:17 257:6 265:7 capital 75:16

233:12,13,16 capsule 91:7 97:1,2

97:6,12 192:12 capsules 96:17,19 136:16 capture 102:16 142:4 251:18 252:11,13 card 229:12,14

231:5,6 232:3 233:20 cards 228:4 care 109:9 careful 53:19 103:8

207:12 217:15 254:11 carried 74:17 case 37:6 44:1 46:2

49:6 52:15 79:1,8 79:10 95:16 201:13 222:5 234:12 235:19 237:8,9 252:15 cases 77:11,21 133:11 186:19 229:5 233:22 234:1,13 cash 226:6 229:14

231:18 248:21 249:9 251:1 254:19 cash/check 232:4 catalog 147:18 149:22 150:16 153:10,14 158:10 186:13 catalogs 148:1

### 202-234-4433 Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Page 273 153:9 154:22 188:7 catalogue 79:8 catalogues 73:13 120:7 categories 110:14 120:9 123:19 142:1 category 142:17 188:11 196:21 221:22 cause 133:10 caution 210:1 cautions 71:15 CCT 90:15 118:22

141:10 198:11 CCTs 198:8 CEE 130:6 131:3 ceiling 84:17 cell 10:6 center 32:14,15,16 109:7 110:17 218:21 central 236:9 CEO 172:13 certain 28:3 42:3

43:5 88:12 89:4 93:1 94:2 105:6 155:21 193:22 195:13,18 196:15 231:22 238:7 certainly 59:2 71:8

86:16 100:14 106:4 130:5 216:2 230:3 certification 46:11

58:1,6 61:4,9,14 153:4,16 157:15 174:17 certified 149:18,21 153:1,15 178:20 185:20 186:4,9,10 186:12,18 187:2 192:3 certifies 149:19 cetera 84:2 110:10 110:10,10 CFL 189:6,11 213:19 CFLs45:14 104:12

106:14 213:16 217:21 CFR25:4 31:15 chair 6:3 challenges 192:5 chance 163:13

248:8 change 25:17 42:4

44:18 100:2 101:1 122:16 185:7,11 206:7 228:8 239:2 239:4 259:12 260:22 changed 74:8 183:22 206:6 264:13 changer 83:8 changes 27:12,17

28:15,20 51:4 59:13,16 82:11 102:22 185:7,9 202:17 258:11 changing 112:15

211:17 246:5 channels 117:17 chaotic 211:16

231:22 characteristics

24:16 25:16 32:12 97:14 109:8 118:15 119:5 143:11 159:4 160:10 characterization

212:10 215:13 characterize 113:16 116:16 Charlie 2:3 6:16

29:3,5 38:5 44:1 55:17,18 149:14 152:12,13,17 158:3 167:16 171:1 185:18 210:22 211:1 216:10,11 219:18 222:2 229:1 231:4 233:1 239:17,18 240:20 250:10 252:5 254:9 259:16 Charlie's 37:13

251:22 chart24:10 125:17 charter 115:9 chat220:4 check 36:2,2 126:10 142:19 checked40:21 Chevron 256:15 chiming 267:1 China98:1 207:7

207:10 China's 172:20 Chinese 209:4 choice 176:17 choices 176:9 choose 140:3,22

210:12 choosing 240:13 chose 51:17 80:21 chosen 87:13 141:2 141:8 187:11 circline 77:10

92:11 123:15 circuit27:2 circuits 219:20 circulating 64:17 cited 210:7 221:6 clarification 25:8

27:14 28:17 38:3 66:1 87:9 175:22 178:11 clarified 173:5 clarify 53:12 132:6 135:11,15 171:22 clarity 65:5 class 80:2 106:11 111:5 118:12 119:11 123:1,6 124:6,21 132:14 132:20 140:8,22 141:16 145:22 146:17 163:22 174:4 232:12,13 252:3,4 253:13 classes 77:3 88:12 116:14 118:5,6,16 119:6,8,18 121:21 123:10 124:2,4,11 140:3,5,18,18 141:1,8 144:6,22 197:20 198:1 235:2 clean 206:20 cleaned 217:10 clear 29:22 45:22

54:18 101:2,4 157:22 clearly 30:4 close 100:18 150:12 186:20 187:18 closed 98:4,4 closer 103:15 closing 3:16 9:11 coal 98:5 228:11 coal-fired 242:2 coating 130:22 coatings 91:6,6 126:18,20 136:16 136:17 191:7 193:19 194:2,15 codes 241:8,11 coefficient 189:22

200:17 coefficients 196:8 coffee 68:2 coincides 39:19 cold 182:12,22 collaboration 69:9 colleague 50:11 collects 225:22 color 90:14 118:22 119:1 141:6 164:18 188:20 colored 92:20 136:20 column 190:11 combine 94:6 combined 1:5 4:4 216:18 come 30:6 32:22

37:2 100:8 112:14 115:19 123:18 138:15 181:18 194:6 205:2 223:3 240:15 258:5 260:15 261:13 comes 47:5 54:13

59:10 70:18 99:20 148:9 212:2 250:2 coming 104:6 153:3 165:4,13 229:22 230:3 257:22 261:14 265:20 comment 8:3 12:11 13:11 14:2,7,10 16:3,14 17:1,4 20:19 31:4 32:3 38:22 45:20 47:1 47:3,22 48:4 49:10,11 52:7 57:4,6 58:22 59:20 61:13,17,20 67:3 86:22 97:20 100:7 104:9 106:8 112:18 131:16 132:4,6,11 133:4 133:16 141:18 142:5,8 144:9 146:2 148:17,19 151:6,18 157:9 162:5 163:14 168:9 179:7,10 180:18 181:6 184:8 190:6 191:5 197:17 199:2 202:1,3 203:4,18 209:21 210:17 213:4 215:12 242:19,22 243:17 247:14,19 248:6 249:19 255:8 261:22 262:18 263:9,15,19 264:3

### 202-234-4433 Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Page 274 264:5,9 265:7,11 265:11 268:14 commented 54:15 108:3 commenting 55:3 comments 5:9 9:9

9:15 10:2 11:9 12:8 13:16 14:2 16:8,10 21:1,2 22:2,9,9 23:19 24:2 28:22 30:12 31:5,8 34:1 37:11 47:20 51:8 54:9 60:14,19 64:12,21 66:10 67:1,1,11 69:1 71:21 80:3,5 86:7,21 90:1 99:18 100:11,12 102:20 104:2 106:7 108:20 119:17 123:9 124:8,11 127:6 128:3,5 132:2 137:5,6,8 139:9 143:21 177:5 180:20 182:14 183:4 187:3 191:11 192:4 198:17,20 203:6,8 203:12 204:14 205:15 206:4 221:13 222:14,18 226:16 246:20 247:6 249:16 252:1 256:9,13 257:14 262:2 263:14 265:13 268:10,16 commercial 37:16

81:6,9 82:10,17 172:2 176:19 212:20 216:4 217:3 220:20 225:2,6 226:9 230:17 237:15 238:22 241:7 247:10 commercialization 44:11 commercialize

45:6 commercially 116:21 143:18 160:9 161:19 179:18 180:16 181:1 commercially-av... 147:17 148:21 152:4,6 173:18 commercial/indu...

238:19 241:14 Commission40:1

56:13 commitment 69:9 Committee 115:4 common 140:7 141:11,15 153:6 160:17 compact92:4

95:12 123:16 169:2 213:11 236:4 254:3,6 companies 75:20 130:14 188:10 210:18 245:5 company 1:20

64:16 130:20 172:22 188:7,16 204:13 218:15 250:18,22 251:4 comparability

26:13 156:9 comparable 178:13 comparatively

98:13 compare 65:19 155:17 compared 59:13

92:7 233:11 242:6 comparing 151:15 156:1,13 comparison42:10 comparisons 65:15 compatible 82:4 compete 172:8 competing 164:11 competition 75:19

83:3,6 competitive 93:22

94:9,14 204:1 competitors 204:8 complete 9:20

44:14 46:11,15 245:14 completed44:12 114:11 completely 156:6

252:5 261:10 completion 70:16 complex 147:14 compliance 20:2

59:4 143:13 148:7 151:16,21 compliant58:15 148:15 163:16 comply 174:4 component 193:3

262:22 components 63:4 149:9 224:2 composition 128:6 compositions 126:19 comprises 224:20

225:13 251:10 concentrate 110:15 concept229:15 concern 35:5,20

36:22 37:9 43:9 44:21 47:8 51:1 76:15 84:20 133:7 176:16 181:8 193:1 209:8 227:5 concerned 56:8

60:7 70:7 72:1 83:1 99:21 146:6 172:4 187:10 188:13 195:2 201:3 221:1 243:3 243:13,18 concerning 16:11 189:13 concerns 54:11

55:10 69:2,17 70:6 71:22 72:8 80:13 83:4 103:22 127:19,22 239:21 concise 10:9 concluded 27:11,16

28:14,19 268:19 conclusion 30:2,4,6

50:10 55:8 61:18 65:2 conclusions 54:16 concrete 78:18 concurrent 61:8

74:16 condition 182:22 conditioning 229:5

236:9 conditions 26:21

40:18 41:3 conduct41:21

78:10 88:13 205:12 206:9 249:5,14 conducted40:20

58:13 78:6 86:19 109:14 conducting 26:20

248:2 257:1 conferred 264:4 confess 251:7 confidential 157:9 confirm 60:14 confirmation 64:18 confirmed 64:19 confusion 111:22 Congress 71:9 cons 189:18 consecutive 27:4 Consequently

71:15 conservation 3:9

4:5 8:15 16:2,5 18:5,7 41:19 88:2 88:10,11 90:5 91:13 118:12 223:21 consider 12:22

72:22 90:4 91:18 123:22 141:4 143:16 159:3 163:9,15 166:15 173:12 174:12 189:10 191:11 202:15 228:13 230:20 232:8,12 255:22 256:2 260:14 265:16 considerably 73:21 consideration 9:17

52:10 97:10 267:9 considerations

97:5 187:13 considered 22:13

22:14 37:18 76:3 93:22 94:9 119:15 120:19 144:22 202:13 214:4 234:10 255:15 considering 21:11

72:9 92:3 95:7 108:6 118:14 119:6 124:5 141:13 158:21 173:10,11 174:8 175:3 183:8 198:1 198:6,9,13,16 232:13 consistency 26:13 consistent51:20

54:10 163:10 consists 225:18 constant90:16 constitutes 89:10 constraints 118:16 119:12 construction

208:17 223:22 244:13,14 constructive

265:17 consult53:2 Consulting 1:20,21

### 202-234-4433 Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Page 275 1:21 7:5,7,9 15:15 consumer 18:7

72:16 73:16 77:6 77:13 81:10 82:1 83:10 111:2 118:10,14 224:3 238:8 257:3 consumers 82:10 111:21 117:5 176:11,18 188:22 189:4 223:21 244:8,8 247:11 consumption

225:14,15 237:8 237:11 consumptions

212:13 contacted 54:22 contains 39:11 contemplate 71:3 content 67:9 72:2

86:8 context 127:9 187:20 contiguous 61:20 continually 55:13 continue 26:9 28:1

31:10 98:21 132:21 161:2 164:8 165:15,16 172:18 247:15 continues 44:12 continuing 265:18 continuous 174:19 continuously-roll... 152:9 control 218:13

222:7,9 240:8 controlling 112:9 controls 121:13

219:20 220:14,15 220:22 221:21 222:1,4 241:9,14 245:15 conventional 76:3 112:11 conversation 67:13 conversationally 54:8 conversations 5:6 10:7 conversion 237:12

241:19 convey 70:5 convinced 137:19

200:10 240:17 COOK 1:18 Cooke 6:8,8 34:19

35:2 44:7,17,20 46:5,16 50:22,22 52:5 53:15,18 54:5 59:20 60:16 61:22 62:1 63:7 63:13,19 66:5 96:2 102:19 109:5 109:5 111:11 113:1,6 114:7,12 115:3 117:20 121:16 124:14 125:3 128:15 131:15 133:4 144:18,18 146:5 146:21 147:1 150:7 160:7 161:5 161:11 162:1 167:10 169:10 185:13,16 192:22 205:19 206:10,14 207:12 217:14 226:22 243:2 244:10,14,18,21 245:3,10 246:12 Cooke's 97:20 Cool 164:15 cooled40:22 coordination

207:20 copy 69:1 corner 267:21 correct29:18 45:3

63:13 135:20 142:21 143:8 153:19 162:7 167:10 179:2 186:5 187:5,6 corrected 172:1 correlated 90:14 118:22 141:6 corresponding

73:16 90:6 corresponds 184:20 cost 3:14 9:5 62:5,8

62:21 70:18,20 99:7 101:7,15 127:21 128:12 139:19 154:15 191:13 209:22 210:9 215:1 223:16 224:2,3,4 224:12,19,20,21 225:3,4,6,7,9,13 225:15,17 226:11 226:12,13,14 227:7 228:3 229:9 230:21 233:4,6 237:18,19,21 238:6 257:2 costs 65:8,8,8,11,13

65:15,19 72:16 75:14 83:16 224:20 225:11 226:20 229:3 230:18 Counsel 1:22 7:11 counterpoint 100:19 country 98:15 131:13 133:6 couple 29:6 95:19 168:6 179:12,16 180:19 190:15,16 218:8,10 228:4 238:16 courier 67:2 course45:8 74:9

86:10 214:16 231:11 236:13 263:21 courtyard 208:14 cover 91:13 126:17 169:14 coverage 3:9 8:16

88:7 91:9,18 96:5 122:22 covered 12:4 18:13

26:16 36:10 63:20 88:18 89:14 91:20 92:7,13,14 96:6 105:14 118:6 133:2 135:10,17 135:19 136:4 138:12 164:7 165:17 166:2,11 184:13 263:21 covering 93:15 covers 184:9 create 249:4 created 119:11 creative 245:12 credit 83:15 229:12

231:5,18 232:3 233:20 creep 76:15 CRI 163:18 164:4,5

167:11 CRIs 167:13 criteria 116:19 179:11 criterion 27:5 28:2

49:17 critical 47:17 164:19 207:1 cross 250:14 cross-referencing

76:11 crowd 138:2 crust207:11 cumulative 74:16

74:18 255:16 curiosity 191:22 curious 42:16 43:1

57:11 183:21 239:10 246:9 current 19:11

24:13 27:9,15 28:4,6,8,18 41:2 72:6 73:12 80:12 98:11 100:13 105:11,18 122:16 128:9 162:19 163:10 currently 6:3 26:3

91:12 92:7,13,14 96:19 105:9,13 107:22 131:1 143:20 189:11 216:13 Curry 1:19 6:14,14

22:16 35:8,8,10 35:17,22 38:12,12 45:13,18 47:21,21 48:4,8 50:1 134:20,20 135:3 150:14,14,17 customers 82:20 129:6,22 130:16 238:22 245:8 250:1 cut55:9 64:1,2

98:17 cutoff 112:8 cuts 76:17 cycle41:22 42:1

47:4,15 83:16 139:19 210:9 215:1 223:16 224:12 226:20 257:2 cycles 88:14 C78.81 24:14 25:15 C78.81-2005 24:13

25:13 C78.81-2010 26:1 D D 3:1 daily41:1 dance 113:18 dangerous 103:8 dark 244:9 data 16:10 33:16

33:16 55:7 58:2 59:3 73:19,22 74:1 76:21 77:17

### 202-234-4433 Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Page 276 77:20 79:7,15 86:11 103:20 117:16 153:12,13 157:8,11,12,18 186:9 205:11 212:2,5 216:17,20 216:22 217:1,9 221:1 225:9,10 226:1 227:20,21 231:7 234:21,22 246:10 247:2,4 250:7 database 173:17 datasets 157:7 date4:20 14:19,20 14:22 20:2 70:14 70:17 71:5 73:14 99:15 102:10 213:10 264:6 dates 19:19 70:9 David 104:11 day 9:3,8 13:10

68:13 100:9 213:22 214:20 215:7 263:9,22 Daylight 164:15 days 10:9 17:1,4

255:4 dead 199:22 deadline 86:14

263:15 deal 109:9 dealing 8:12

250:12 251:13 death 76:16 debate 122:3 debit229:14

231:18,20 232:3 debt226:13 232:8 decades 164:16 decide 53:7 decided 36:12

210:4 decides 33:6 deciding78:17 decision 56:20

71:14 115:19 210:4 decisions 189:1

210:6,20 228:5 declared 150:11,15 150:18 declined 170:3

213:14 decrease 244:6 decreases 118:20 defer 38:1 define 22:20 53:20 108:17 126:5 158:1 defined 32:20 40:5 158:12 238:6 253:12 defines 91:9 defining 109:1 definitely 35:13

36:2 38:3 107:9 120:8 121:3 145:17 251:15,17 267:9 definition 32:19,22

39:12 40:8,8,11 53:1 88:19,21 164:4 202:4,9,11 definitions 158:6 degree 28:10 112:3 112:5 degrees 90:15 122:7,8 delay 13:15 79:4

244:22 delayed 236:13

258:2 delaying 244:10,12

245:2 delays 14:4 243:9 delivering 108:12 Deluxe 164:15,15 demand 72:14 73:5

73:16 77:13 98:9 98:10 99:8 demanded 245:8 demanding76:19 demands 75:18 demographics 217:6 denoted 91:3 Department 1:3,16 1:22 4:8 9:21 10:3 54:17 64:8 69:7 70:10 82:22 83:1,3 94:21 211:4 department's

206:18 dependent52:2 depending 94:10 108:18 130:11 235:22 depends 56:22 derive 225:20 derived41:14 157:15 describe 110:5

238:3 described 7:19

67:8 93:4 describes 61:5

214:11 describing 68:11 description 191:6 descriptive49:14 design42:11 78:11

97:12 117:8 140:11 156:19 163:6 174:2 203:13 designed42:2

75:22 77:12 122:9 133:9 192:2 designer47:2 designs 91:7 160:9 173:12 203:21 204:3,12 detail 24:8 25:10

40:15 89:5 90:8 117:12 140:20 167:19 214:11 224:18 257:11,11 detailed 60:14

78:10 103:17 191:6 details 79:14 detector 28:11

37:14 determination 3:13

8:22 38:6 53:6 139:16 204:18,20 determinations

69:21 71:18 73:8 determine 20:9

41:14 61:6 73:7 88:2,14 89:12 91:19 116:13 122:12 139:16 156:15 174:18 179:15 197:20 212:10,19 234:15 234:19 235:1 determined 25:6

61:15 76:9 93:5 179:18 180:2 183:13 192:1 197:22 219:9 225:16 determines 223:20 determining 73:10

79:21 109:15 118:15 124:1 155:14 159:6 205:16 212:12 226:17 235:7 develop 140:12 146:17 173:18 174:19 235:4 developed42:11 198:2 205:1 developing 18:12

70:22 86:12 108:16 development5:5

76:5 109:9 161:12 191:2 developments

20:12 31:21 develops 173:22 deviation 196:3 deviations 42:3 196:5 devote76:5 114:20 dial 266:17 diameter 88:20

92:18 124:1 198:14 200:9,13 201:1,9,12 diameters 159:1 Diego 6:22 difference 30:18

84:16 151:17,19 152:2 178:4 186:12,15,16 216:5 237:7 differences 147:12 181:15 different4:17 5:5

55:15 56:13 57:6 59:16 66:7 77:3 95:17 96:20 105:19 110:8,14 112:2 115:2 118:9 119:21,22 120:4 122:1 123:17 147:22 149:17 153:3,17 155:17 156:12,13 158:9 163:3 180:21 191:8 195:11 200:12 202:6 207:5 225:1 237:22 250:18,19 250:22 differently 122:1 difficult4:20 41:21

74:21 266:22 267:1 diffuser 121:16 dimability 188:20 189:9 dimensional 24:15

25:15 diminish 238:9

265:6 diminishing 263:1 dimmer 219:14 dimmers 214:6,7

### 202-234-4433 Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Page 277 214:12,13 217:22 218:17 219:10,12 219:21 220:14 dimming 218:6 dioxide 258:12 dire 100:15 245:19 direct 119:13,16 120:20 121:5,7,9 248:16 262:15 directed 238:1 direction 200:15 directional 32:13 108:9 directionality 22:8

22:12,19 23:13 109:6 directly 10:12 68:2 146:1 178:13 directs 26:3 90:4 disagree 74:13 160:8 disagreement

58:10,14 disagreements

74:12 disallow41:8 disallowing42:8 disconnect 144:4 179:21 discontinued 187:15 discount226:5,7,10

229:3 237:22 discounting 205:2 discrepancy 148:9 discretion 87:14 discuss 16:6 17:22

57:21 89:5 95:12 248:1 discussed 66:15 185:9 251:16 discussing 90:7 113:7 126:14 discussion 11:12 16:9 49:13 158:19 200:8 259:19 260:8 discussions 34:3 disintegrate 194:3 displayed 69:10

78:9 disposal 230:18,20 disregard 252:20 dissent 64:19 distance 97:5 distinct 119:3 distinction 126:4 132:14 distinguish 181:4 distribution 58:3

61:8 117:17 121:14 235:1 distributional 53:5 diversity 214:18 divided 118:6 150:4,5 224:6 Division 6:3 114:16 docket221:11 document 12:17 16:5,12,16 17:2 21:6,8,9,21 46:17 60:9 69:4,16 76:12 77:2 79:13 80:14,14 83:20 84:12 87:21 88:1 89:15 93:11 99:16 145:6 175:20 176:1,7 177:9,13 179:13,17 216:1 220:12,21 239:15 257:12,21,21 258:8 263:15 documenting

219:19 259:3 documents 12:13 16:18 23:21 48:9 100:1 DOE 3:3,17 7:10 12:21 13:22 16:10 18:15 19:1,5,7 20:3,6,11,19 21:9 21:14,18 24:18 25:6,8,12 26:3,6,9 26:17 27:11,16 28:14,19,22 30:14 31:19 32:3 33:6 33:13 36:9,13 38:3 39:14 40:3,9 40:13 41:8 42:7 46:12 49:18 51:12 51:13,17,18 57:21 58:19 60:6 61:12 61:15,17 70:18 71:7,15 79:4 80:20,22 81:14 82:13 83:5,15 85:7,9,13 86:10 86:12,17 88:1,3 88:13 89:6,16,22 90:4,16 91:3,9,19 92:3 93:5,8 95:6 101:1,17 102:8,20 103:6 104:14,17 107:2,9,20 108:6 115:16 116:2,15 116:17,19 117:15 118:6,11,14 119:5 119:11,16 123:21 124:4 126:15,21 127:1,17 128:3,5 129:11 131:20 136:13,19,21 137:5 140:1,5,6,9 140:12,16,21 141:4,9,13,14 143:14,19 145:20 146:1 147:15,22 148:2,5,20 149:20 151:8,13 153:6 157:10 158:20 159:2,7,10 163:8 163:14 173:8,12 173:17,22 174:7 174:11,16,21 175:2 179:13,18 180:1,5,14 182:14 185:7 186:11 190:18 191:10,19 197:19 198:6,9,17 201:9 202:15 203:11 204:21 205:10,11,15 207:1 208:7 211:22 212:18 219:3,9 220:16 221:5 224:8,11,15 225:1,5,8,20 226:5,16 227:18 234:19,21 237:14 248:2,19,22 249:4 249:9,11,14 252:2 252:6,12 253:19 256:22 258:17 259:5 260:4 DOE's 15:19 16:1

20:14,20 24:21 27:14 28:17 30:4 39:10 64:4 137:2 152:3 179:8 187:4 189:17,19 doing 20:13 52:11 106:17,20 129:11 154:14 172:20 195:21 199:20 211:12 217:2 218:12 221:12 222:22 230:17 245:15 268:7 dollars 211:11,15 domestic 254:5

255:2 double 201:11

252:22 double-ended

201:16,18,21 doubling 145:16 doubt 186:1 Doug 1:13,15 3:4

4:10,16 243:22 downstream 139:19 Dr 6:1 12:10 39:1

46:22 50:19 57:5 57:8,11 58:8,16 99:11 106:1 125:19 137:12 142:6 143:3 147:3 156:5 169:22 170:10 171:4,12 171:15,19 187:9 200:7,16,18,20,21 206:16 207:17 219:6,17 220:2,9 220:19 221:10 232:6 242:9 245:20,22 250:4 251:7 262:14 264:1 265:10 266:13 drafty 182:22 draw 30:1 64:22

208:7 211:19 252:2 draws 253:20 dreamed 129:10 drive 97:21 127:20

243:16 driven 118:21 drives 104:3 driving 96:15 130:8 drop 47:16 drops 62:10,11

246:2,15 due 13:16 41:21

52:10 72:16 75:20 95:15,18 97:1 98:11 103:5 165:2 174:9 182:10 244:6 duly 37:9 dumps 244:15 D.C 1:13 255:4 E E 3:1 earlier71:8 99:18 107:16,20 128:16 161:16 179:10 187:14 216:12,18 217:18 245:4 258:3 264:2 266:7 earliest79:11 early 23:9 70:14

71:1,16,17 99:16

### 202-234-4433 Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Page 278 101:10 113:9,9 115:8 179:21 180:4 227:21 235:20 earth 6:10 72:4,14

90:20 94:19 96:3 96:7 97:22 100:12 103:3 127:7,16,18 127:20 128:6,8,10 128:12 131:8 168:21,22 169:19 193:6 205:22 206:5,5,18,19 207:9,9 209:8,22 243:10 Earthjustice 1:17

255:12 earths 72:7 98:14 100:15 103:19 170:3 209:14 earth's 207:11 easier 12:16 200:3 easily 68:20 98:14 easy 98:12 199:12 echo 251:22 echoing 11:18 economic 61:16 189:18 228:15 252:13 economically 92:1 economy 75:17

236:14 Edison 2:2 6:13,22

80:8 81:11 edition 31:18 education 111:1,6 Edwards7:14,14 EEI 3:8 13:6 36:7

42:15 93:20 110:3 129:2 134:12 154:4 159:20 164:2 166:19 175:14 177:12 183:16 195:1 213:4 235:18 238:16 241:6 254:3 257:19 259:1 264:11 effect74:5,16 76:14

78:2,11 81:3 89:20 90:11 99:20 100:21 131:4 167:9 235:22 240:16 247:8,9 effective 35:3 70:9

70:17 71:5 101:8 101:16 191:13 effectively 187:15 effectiveness 108:11 effects 204:1 257:3 efficacies 140:15 148:1 163:19 174:18 182:8 191:3 efficacious 90:18 136:17 140:7,10 141:15 143:15 173:9,12,21 efficacy 21:19

22:18 26:8 27:18 28:21 31:14 38:8 38:8 51:21 73:7 81:16 82:14 84:3 91:1 107:22 108:4 108:5,7,8,21 116:15 117:11 118:18,20 119:3 124:16 126:15 127:12 139:17 140:13 147:20 148:5,6 149:18,21 149:22 150:1,3 151:15,21 153:2 154:5 155:13 156:16 157:5,6,13 162:16 173:7 174:1,6,8,20,22 175:2,3 177:15 178:14,15 183:12 185:3,6,10 186:16 191:8 196:6 197:20 235:9 efficiency 2:3 6:17 69:13 72:9,19 77:12 78:13 85:21 96:16 99:2 109:11 115:22 117:17 126:19 127:10,11 146:8,12 147:19 155:16 158:9,10 176:6 177:21 179:16 202:16,20 203:2 212:11 252:9 efficient72:12 120:5 123:15 130:9,17 131:11 164:11 196:11 240:3,10 EIA's 226:2 eight 66:13 124:4 125:18 141:22 145:16 176:13 193:13 eight-foot 84:1,9 147:6 EISA 19:22 39:6

43:13 59:11,14 60:1,4 88:17 92:22 95:16,18 either 53:16 64:1,6

77:17 95:16 129:7 162:12 168:6 195:18 196:15 231:13 241:2 EL 174:4 elaborate 63:3 electric 2:2 6:13,21

6:22 80:8 81:11 226:1 228:3 electrical 1:17 5:18

24:15 25:2,15 225:9 electricity 225:14

225:14,17,18,19 226:3 228:10 237:11,21 electrode 126:18 electronic 69:1 Electronics 1:20 6:2 element97:22 elements 72:4,14

206:18,19 207:9 207:10 eliminate 11:19 105:11 124:16 125:18 132:13 eliminated 125:14 134:8 173:10 eliminates 217:20 eliminating 126:4 elliptical 88:21 ELs 174:1 EL1 175:4,7 179:8 183:8 184:4 email 67:2 129:4 170:1,2 264:11,12 emails 129:22 emerging 72:15

235:5 Emily 11:5,5 emission 127:14 emissions 258:1,15 emit 173:13 emitted 119:2 emphasize 158:5 empirically 41:13 employed 76:17 employment

248:16 257:6,8 enacted 95:16 132:21 enamored 181:17 encourage 10:1 157:18 232:18 encouraging 102:8

203:19 ended 201:12 ends 17:1,4 67:4

68:1 end-user 139:17 end-users 72:22 energy 1:3,16,19 1:22 2:1,3 3:9,13 4:5,8 6:15,17,19 8:15,22 16:2,4 18:5,6,22 35:12 41:19 45:3,16 64:8 69:7 72:19 73:20 76:22 77:19 78:13 88:2,9,11 90:5 91:13,21 96:9 100:7 103:9 109:10 118:7,11 129:3 130:9,17 131:11,12 134:4 154:14,18 155:14 173:16 204:19 206:20 212:9,9,10 212:11,13 213:9 213:10,19 214:2,8 214:9 218:2,16 219:10 221:20 222:1,14 223:20 225:17,20,21 226:2 234:15 235:12 237:7,8,10 237:13 238:7,10 262:19,20 EnergyStar.gov/l...

35:15 enforcement 58:21

59:1,6 engage 170:14 engaged 96:20 engineering 3:12

8:21 58:1,11 117:9,13 118:5 137:11,14 139:4 139:14,15 140:2 147:16 203:12 ensure 156:14 185:20 entire 32:11 entirely 79:13 168:5 entities 61:17 126:3 entity 55:1 204:2 envelope 97:7 environmental

228:17 257:9,19 EPA 228:5 241:21

257:22 258:4,18

### 202-234-4433 Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Page 279 259:8 260:14,19 EPACT 70:13 71:2

79:19 95:13 EPCA 20:3 39:6

88:11 90:4 252:11 EPCA's40:8 equal 87:4 141:7 160:21 173:13 equation 91:1 151:22 183:11,14 186:15 196:5,6,14 equations 134:15 174:19 equipment73:10 161:18,18 233:13 233:13 equity 226:15

232:8 equivalent267:3 ER 88:22 92:15 106:3 110:9 ESA 93:7 especially 5:8 60:1

75:12 80:10 81:5 81:7,12 83:9 85:14 106:20 110:5 111:5 163:21 179:21 186:8,19 195:7 204:7 213:4,19 214:17 227:19 228:3 231:15 236:18,19 238:19 241:6,7,14 essentially 49:7 115:10 128:17 245:2 250:15 establish 18:2 19:15 20:17 33:8 160:13 204:20 established 18:6,15 19:3 114:10 119:8 establishes 118:11 establishing 88:11 175:3 179:9 183:8 202:13 establishment 118:4 estimate 52:14,17

225:11 226:11 234:9 248:13 estimated 89:22 estimates 80:1 117:18 128:7 234:14 242:15 252:8 et 84:2 110:9,10,10 Europe 201:16 europium 72:5 171:13,17 172:5 evaluate 168:4

216:7 evaluating 185:8 evaluation 164:18

263:18 265:5 evaporated42:1 event58:9 eventually 246:18 everybody 113:18 138:3 181:16 everybody's 233:15 evidence 72:15

99:22 evolve 267:8 evolving 266:14 exacerbate 96:6

243:11 exacerbating 99:8 exact 194:7 exactly 22:17,20

56:22 115:1 146:5 160:15 170:16 253:11 examine44:2 47:9 126:15 136:13 248:16 examined 187:22 examines 20:11 example 58:17 77:3

78:19 148:3 155:19 174:11 176:13 180:8 188:8 207:7 exceed 191:9 exceeds 14:14 61:6 92:18 excellent 128:22

227:10 232:19 exception40:9 182:3 excessive 133:10 excited 222:4 exclusively 132:9 exempt 104:18 105:9,16 164:6 exempted 89:4

93:1,6 94:22 exempting 65:1 exemption 164:17 exist240:16 existence 167:1 existing 31:12 104:5 109:19 165:14 167:3,4 217:20 243:12 245:1 262:8 exists 133:8 160:3 expand 112:21 expanded 88:18,21 expanding 91:18 expansion 59:21 expect26:6 35:2 104:2 128:18 160:17 166:12 250:1 expected 104:19 159:16 246:3 expects 81:14

82:13 expenditure 233:17 expensed 233:14

233:16 expensive 102:7 experience 71:11

99:19 159:22 193:21 expert209:13 expertise 209:3,7 experts 30:11 38:2 explain 30:3 explains 179:13 explanation 29:21 exponent200:17 export 172:20 express 51:1 193:1 expressed 133:7

224:13 extended 13:17 14:2,7,11 60:10 122:22 extending 96:5 extends 134:13 extension 12:17 13:1 17:10 extensions 13:8 extensive 76:20 extent76:14 154:19 extra 180:9 extraction 207:8

209:2,7 extrapolated 73:6

205:9 extrapolating 195:22 extremely 102:7 eye 28:13 F facilitate 53:7 116:3 Facilitator 1:13,15

4:3 5:11,20 6:5 7:12,15 10:17 11:4 12:6,19 13:3 13:21 14:6 15:4,8 17:8,13 21:1 22:1 22:4 23:17,22 24:6 29:3 30:8 31:1,3,7 33:3,10 33:22 34:9,12,15 35:1,6,9,16 36:4 37:10,22 38:21 39:2 42:12 43:7 44:6,15,19,22 45:11,16,19 46:18 46:21 47:14,19 48:2,7 49:9 50:7,9 50:14,17,21 51:7 51:10 52:4 53:11 53:17,21 54:6 55:16 57:3,7,10 58:18 59:7,19 60:13,17,21 61:19 62:18 63:1,10,14 64:5,13 65:4,17 66:4,9,12,16,19 67:6 68:9 80:4 86:6,20 87:15 93:17 94:18 95:5 95:22 96:11 99:10 100:3 102:18 103:10 104:8,14 104:21 105:22 106:6 107:4,11,13 107:17 109:4,22 111:9 112:17 113:3,10 115:13 115:20 116:5 117:19,22 119:19 120:11,16 121:17 122:5,14,18 123:3 123:11,20 124:13 124:22 125:4,7,12 125:16,21 126:11 128:14,21 130:4 131:14 132:1 133:3,12,15 134:9 135:4,14,21 136:6 136:9 137:1,8,17 138:1 139:1,6,8 141:19 142:3,7 143:1,5 144:1,8 144:16 145:2 146:4 147:2 149:5 149:13 150:12 151:5 152:12,15 153:22 156:3,7 157:1 158:2,13 159:17 161:14,20 162:2 163:11 164:12 165:7,10 165:20 166:7,16 167:6,15 168:14 169:12,21 170:22

### 202-234-4433 Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Page 280 172:9,21 173:2 175:11 177:4 178:8,22 179:3 181:5,22 182:18 183:3 184:6,15,19 184:22 185:12,18 187:1,7 189:14 191:21 192:8,16 193:11 194:4,19 197:5,7,10,15 198:19 199:15 200:4,14 201:5 203:3,16 204:10 204:16 205:18 208:10 209:9,17 210:22 213:1 215:10 216:10 217:12 218:4 219:15 220:7 221:8 222:2,11,15 222:19 223:6,14 226:19 227:2,12 227:15 228:21 229:20 230:5,8,13 230:22 231:9 232:5 233:1 234:5 235:14 237:3 238:2,12 239:17 240:19 241:3,17 242:8,17 243:21 244:2 245:1,21 246:19 247:17 248:5 249:18 250:8 251:6,20 253:22 254:9 255:5,7,10 256:5 256:15,18 257:16 258:16 259:16 260:12 261:18 262:12 263:7,17 264:8 265:2 266:2 266:12 267:12,17 268:8 facilities 66:7 75:20 facility 75:13 facing 103:2 fact43:19 103:2 104:9 113:19 129:5 156:18 177:16 195:7 214:5,18 218:1 240:9 249:20 252:6,20 255:18 257:22 259:3 260:20 261:10,12 factor 90:7 134:14 145:7 187:11 200:11 201:1,10 202:14 205:21 214:4,16 factored 182:13 factors 41:14 42:9

90:3 98:1 109:11 174:1 188:1 198:2 198:20 200:22 203:6,8 213:8 214:19,20 237:12 241:19 255:14 Fahrenheit 122:8 fail 45:8 52:13 failing 52:20 failure40:6,22 42:6

52:19,22 53:8 54:2 133:10 fair 178:12 fairly 98:12 106:15 fall 104:12 258:6

258:11 falls 193:2 familiar 30:7 67:22 165:4 199:3 251:8 261:21 family 79:22 99:5 130:10 142:2 fanciest 191:7 far 64:21 74:10 115:11 161:17 190:11 191:18 197:3 254:7 farther 180:15 fast 113:17 faster45:10 feasibility 69:18 101:19 116:20 feasible 92:1 101:5 140:14 174:5 180:7 191:12 201:21 feature 117:16 features 118:9,10 featuring 153:5 February 216:20 fed 118:5 Federal 13:2,9,18 14:10,12,19,21 37:16 39:22 56:12 80:20 232:1 258:18 259:13 264:13 feedback 11:18 feel 146:2,18

222:16 262:20 feeling 169:14 feels 124:14 felt 38:9 field 32:16 109:8 110:16 Fifth 76:16 Fifty-five 144:10 fight 162:9 figure 242:15 268:9 figures 64:17 filament 39:17 42:2

97:3,15 136:2,18 246:13 filing 61:1,14 fill 87:12 126:18

212:7 final 9:9 18:15 19:21 33:17 36:9 36:14,15 37:10 58:6 61:9 74:10 81:15 86:15 89:6 89:19,21 116:4 166:19 190:7 247:21 258:6,10 258:19 260:15 261:4,8 265:7 finalized 250:3 finally 16:7 17:21 19:11 27:8 28:9 40:13 41:5 66:21 140:16 256:20 finance 226:11,12

229:3,8 financial 226:12

249:7 financing 245:17 find 35:14 78:18

82:2 84:14 210:20 218:9 219:8 222:5 finding 112:5 fine 139:11 239:9 finish45:7,7 86:14

223:3 finished 8:8 9:13

230:14 first 13:10 17:19

26:19 27:21 34:19 40:6 54:13 61:4 70:7 88:5 89:7 91:14 96:14 104:17 111:17 116:8 140:2 165:21 192:21 209:4 211:2 215:10 216:19 224:2,19,20 229:20 249:5 fit201:11,18,21 five 80:19 92:12 103:14 125:20 126:1 130:2 174:22 176:5 214:20 five-foot77:9 fixed 59:5 fixture 81:20 82:6

82:7 216:14,16 217:5 219:13 220:1 229:10 233:19 fixtures 121:2,8

213:18,21 216:15 229:11 230:2 fixture-by 216:13 fixture-by-fixture

217:4 flaw 101:11 flipping 264:18 floated 64:20 floods 236:4 floor 54:8 68:2

84:16 flow41:4 248:21

249:10 251:1 254:19 flows 226:7 fluctuations 72:3 fluorescent 1:6 4:6 15:20 17:16 18:9 18:17 24:16 25:16 35:19 54:14 55:3 72:10 76:2 77:4,8 80:17 91:10,10,12 91:16 92:4,10 95:13 96:3 97:21 98:19 106:13 123:16 163:14 164:5 172:14 183:2 230:21 236:4 249:21 250:21 254:3,6 255:18 fluorescents 169:2

213:12 flux 108:14 focus 10:5 76:1 114:5 211:4 262:22 263:6 focused 83:13 focusing 131:18 folks 11:1,6 14:18

45:10 58:21 59:6 113:14 134:1 207:2 210:11 265:21 follow 13:13 152:19 170:13 209:19 219:16 231:4 246:1 255:12 267:13 followed 172:12 following 8:2,14,21

9:4 61:11 118:15

### 202-234-4433 Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Page 281 200:8 221:15,20 follows 203:4 follow-on 10:2 13:6

57:4,8 65:6 106:10 220:9 241:6 follow-up 36:7

37:12 73:1 121:21 134:11 262:5 foot 84:6 92:12 141:22 144:20 145:16 163:21 176:13 182:4 198:6,7 240:5 forced 130:19 forecast206:12

236:11 forecasting 205:13 forecasts 235:2,5 forget267:5 forgive 110:7 form 115:7 225:22

263:18 265:5 formerly 97:3 forms 100:8 Forrestal 4:9 67:14

67:20 138:4 forth 10:4 18:11

264:18 forward 5:9,10

49:13 100:17 102:15,15 103:8 105:4,20 129:21 131:10 179:14 193:7 209:16 245:9 265:18 found 25:4 26:4

39:17 40:12 141:11 186:14 190:19 202:7 founded 70:1 four 26:19 29:9

79:20 84:5 101:16 102:12 116:19 125:18 163:21 176:5 179:11 182:4 191:8 196:4 198:7 213:22 214:20 215:6 239:14 Fourth 74:13 four-foot25:20 146:16 147:8 148:3 151:1 174:12 framework 3:9 5:8

8:15 12:13,15,17 16:1,5,12,15,19 17:2 21:6,9 23:21 37:3 63:20 69:4 69:16,21 73:8 74:5,7 76:10 77:2 79:12 80:13,14 83:19 84:11 85:7 85:10,12,17 87:21 87:22 89:15 93:11 145:6 175:20 176:1 177:9,12 179:12,22 239:15 257:12,20,21 258:7 259:2,19 260:6 263:14 265:1 frankly 233:4 freezing 158:18 frequencies 29:11 frequency 25:18,19

25:22 26:10,11,15 26:21 27:1 29:8 29:12 41:3 frequently 10:2 181:2 250:16 friends 188:9

262:19 front202:11 froze 139:6 full 9:3 41:14 46:10

46:14 58:7 61:10 130:12 182:17,20 fully 52:17 function 28:12 funded 191:1 funding 218:20 funds 226:12 further 25:8 27:13 28:16 31:21 40:15 52:19 71:21 72:9 72:13 98:8 99:7 124:20 243:12 furthermore 96:8

98:11 future 36:18 48:21

86:1,1 93:7 94:3,7 94:17 128:11 205:13 226:3 243:4 246:17 265:15 G G 3:1 gain76:21 gains 84:10 game 83:8 gas 6:21,22 7:1

126:18 242:3 262:7 gathered 79:7 gathering 103:21 GC 12:21 13:22

58:19 95:6 GE 190:14 252:16 geared 81:8 gears 8:6 general 1:6,6,22

5:3,4 7:10,18 15:20,21 17:16,17 17:22 18:8,9,16 18:17 24:16 40:4 55:13 72:10 77:4 80:17 91:9 96:2 100:14 107:1 123:10 124:10 137:6 140:1 166:22 207:19 238:5 246:13 generally 27:12

28:15 32:18 39:19 45:13 108:14 119:15 120:19 141:9 175:2 224:6 generate 71:13 generated 74:2 79:14 generating 76:13 generation 228:8

228:11 257:5 258:1 gentleman 218:14 getting 33:20 45:12

78:20 130:8,14 153:12 186:20 195:5 199:7 209:6 221:3 GFLs 92:7 give 15:2 38:13

52:10 65:10 94:21 97:13 given 52:21 72:6

74:14 80:2 86:14 86:18 174:4 265:15 glad 11:7 173:5 glass 97:6 126:20 glitches 268:13 globally 70:4 go 11:12 17:20 24:7

34:20 35:17 39:4 40:15 44:13,13 46:13 53:16 54:4 56:1 57:7 65:20 68:3 82:1 85:10 90:11 101:6 109:9 111:15 117:12 120:16 127:4 128:9 129:12 131:4 134:7 135:14 137:18 138:8 139:10 140:19 141:19 149:13 157:4 164:12 166:2 167:4,9 168:14 170:18,19 172:19 180:21 191:18 192:11,18,20,20 193:15 196:13 208:2,19 209:10 209:19 212:4 215:18 217:9 218:2 221:9 223:10 224:18 235:11 238:3 240:22 242:5 243:15 246:6 248:9 250:16 259:15 265:19 goal 69:12 114:21 goes 51:4 81:3

152:19 163:4 206:3 217:16,17 219:11 going4:12 7:18,20

9:2,22 10:20 11:18 15:15 22:21 25:9 32:8,9,20 36:13 48:10 55:19 56:2 61:1,3 81:8 82:1,2,16 86:22 88:3 95:1 99:4,12 99:14 102:2,12 103:8 105:4,20 114:20 115:6 132:9 136:10 137:16 138:3 139:3 147:19 148:14,15 149:2 150:7 151:6 153:13 154:9,11 154:13 155:15,16 156:17 157:20 161:1,3 167:21 168:3,12 176:4 179:14 182:21 188:3,12 189:2,7 189:8 192:16 193:5,7,8,16 195:8 199:12 203:10,22,22 205:21 206:15 207:4,18 208:6 209:16 210:7 211:18 214:1 215:13 216:21 218:7,11 219:18 221:10 223:15

### 202-234-4433 Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Page 282 227:7,7 228:4,7,9 228:19 229:21 230:1,18 235:21 237:4 241:15 243:3,7,11,13,16 243:19 245:8,15 246:11,16 247:4 250:5 252:6 254:21 258:9,13 259:8 260:15 261:5,8 262:9 good4:3 17:11

36:22 43:9 44:2 82:17 100:4 113:10 128:22 134:5 138:13 169:18 213:7 214:2 265:3 Government

248:20 go2meeting 267:16 grade 37:16 granted 13:1 222:6 grappling 210:5 great4:19 66:19

85:2 107:13 109:8 113:22 138:14 176:22 180:12 204:4,4 220:2,7 227:12 265:13 266:19 greater 125:14

159:1 173:13 202:19,20 238:8 greatest 131:12 greatly 74:8 120:2

162:12 191:9 greenhouse 262:6 GRIM 248:20

251:8,10,15 253:5 ground 68:2

138:13 groundbreaking

208:17,19 grounds 74:15 group 51:19 75:16

227:10 growth 228:15 235:5 GSFL 16:1 19:12

26:10 69:16 81:16 88:9 89:11,13 90:10,12 104:12 116:16 123:1,8,10 126:17 127:19 137:5 164:4 183:7 252:4 GSFLs 19:6,8

20:14 24:12,21 61:3 88:12,16 89:8 91:9,14 92:8 118:13 127:11 141:4 144:7 159:2 174:9,22 175:9 205:22 GSFL-IRL 87:21 GSIL 19:12 39:5,7

39:10 51:13 61:2 61:14 GSILs 19:4,6,16

20:14,18 25:1 41:17,18 255:19 guess 30:13 36:17

43:8,10 44:1 59:10,12 107:6 148:10 149:10 152:20 170:12 181:8 183:21 200:2 227:4 232:10 242:10 guessing73:19 guidance 29:8

49:19 guidelines 39:20

238:1 262:8,10 gun 161:22 Gupta 1:20 7:4,4

33:4,5,5 34:10,13 37:22 38:1 46:7,7 46:20 47:12 49:21 50:2,8,11 57:19 57:20 58:14 87:6 87:7 101:21 102:1 104:13 107:5,5 114:8,8,14 115:21 120:14,18 121:6 121:11,15 135:20 135:21,22 136:8 142:12,19 145:8 145:12,15,16 146:13,13,22 147:13,14 150:2,9 150:16,19,22 151:4,11 152:11 153:19 154:17 155:4,8,12 156:11 156:21 160:14,14 161:13 177:7,19 178:5 179:2 185:1 185:15 186:7 187:6 190:5,9 206:2,13 215:15 215:16 230:19 243:22 244:4,4,12 244:16,20 guys43:21 114:11 H habit5:21 Hakkarainen 1:20

6:1,2 12:10,10 39:1 46:22,22 57:5,5,8,11 58:8 58:16 99:11,11 106:1,1 125:19 137:12 143:3 147:3,4 156:5 187:9,10 200:7,18 200:21 219:17 220:2,19 242:9,10 250:4 262:14,15 264:1 half86:15 102:13 103:15 halls 68:1 halogen41:21,22

42:16 47:3,11,15 91:4 96:17,19 97:1,2 134:17 135:18 136:15 185:5 192:12 194:10 hammering 55:13 hand 233:3 234:3

253:1 267:3 handbook 39:21 handed 265:4 handful 252:17 handing 263:18 handling41:6 hands 103:6 267:20 happen 130:1 193:6 243:7,14,19 happened 115:22 130:18 236:8,12 happening 111:20 130:1,3 131:8,22 240:8 241:21 246:15,18 253:12 happens 58:9 165:14 251:2 259:22,22 260:1 happy 129:21 hard 73:19,22 harder75:4,11 118:21 253:15 hardware 82:2 159:21 186:2 231:16 hashing 21:16 head49:3 84:22

200:15 headlamp 246:6 heads 122:19 158:3 health 101:22 117:6 hear 10:9 11:5

87:17 203:19 heard 78:16 114:12 187:14 heat97:9 194:2

236:10 hedge 64:11 heels 100:18 held 93:13 hello 7:13 help 85:13 101:20 112:22 117:20 149:16 158:5,8,11 231:19 232:1 242:10 helpful 10:2 49:2

65:7,13,20 116:1 206:9 221:4 Hi 87:19 HID 172:14 255:19 high 25:18 26:11

26:15,20 29:8,11 81:1,16 120:4,10 121:5 124:16 130:7 131:3 145:16 163:18 164:4,19 180:9 181:20 182:4,8 187:16 194:8,8,11 204:7 205:3,6 217:19 228:16,16 239:8,22 higher47:7,18

81:16,17 82:14,15 92:20 96:15 117:11 122:9 124:19 126:19 127:10,11 128:9 129:9 133:9 147:10 155:16 159:9 173:7 182:8 185:2,6,10 195:9 236:12 252:9 highest 141:2 175:1 175:3 highlight 16:13 highlighted 206:4 high/low 228:14 hint94:21 HIR91:5,6 162:11 162:15 191:7 243:15 historical 99:22 128:9 history 18:4 88:6,9

206:7 hit75:5 HO 121:3 141:22 147:6

### 202-234-4433 Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Page 283 hold 11:20,20 90:1 193:19 holder41:6 holders 119:22 hole 202:21 holes 212:1,7 home 97:21 104:4

213:22 homes 213:17

214:6 218:13 219:5 hope 113:13 207:5

215:4 216:3 265:22 hopefully 55:6

215:17 host261:1 hot 192:13 hour43:18 44:5 162:18,20 163:1 hours42:17,20,20

43:11,12 56:3,4,7 57:17 59:15 212:15,19 213:22 214:20,21 215:6 215:21 216:6,9 217:4 224:7 225:16 239:3,3 house 219:14 222:5

222:6 households 217:7 huge 129:13 193:8

213:9 215:8 236:16 246:15 253:8 human 28:13 109:11 humanitarian 98:3 hundred 180:10 hurricane 242:12 Husain 1:21 3:10

3:13 7:8,8 87:19 87:20 107:15,19 116:7 118:2 120:12 122:21 123:5,21 126:13 133:13 136:11 137:4,10,13,21 139:5,10 142:10 142:21 143:7 144:5,13 158:17 173:6 182:2 183:6 184:17,21 192:15 197:9,13,16 203:11 204:17 212:8 222:13,17 223:5,19 234:8 237:6 238:5 239:12 247:16,22 248:10 256:13,17 256:21 263:11 264:14,17,22 hypothesis 187:4 I ICF 1:19 6:14 ID 138:6 idea 108:10 114:19 ideally 105:15 identical 26:2 identified 77:3 140:11 174:22 175:4 180:20 identifies 140:5 identify 77:22 101:5 116:14 117:10 153:10 180:6 189:19 248:13 identifying 173:7 173:20 IEC 33:2 IEs 22:22 32:20

44:16 48:9 49:3 49:13 179:7 IESNA 18:20 31:13

39:15,16,21 40:17 47:22 48:8 IES-49-2001 48:5 illustrate 71:22 103:21 illustrates 114:1,5 imagination 191:18 impact 3:15 9:6 26:7 27:17 28:20 30:5 59:18 61:16 62:3 74:14 76:8 83:18 118:14,18 139:20,21 166:5 193:9 213:9 214:8 223:20 228:10,18 234:7,13 236:6,16 243:5,10 245:6 248:4,11,17,20 249:3,17 251:9 252:13 253:7 254:17 255:2,17 255:22 257:4,6,10 259:5 impacted 88:18 168:22 impacting 72:19 impacts 117:4,6 119:3 191:14 236:22 237:1 248:12,13,16 249:12 252:3,11 257:5,7 258:14 impedance 27:2,8

28:8 implication 96:18 implications 52:11 implicit71:8 importance 219:12 important 12:9

21:7 80:10 157:10 157:14,16 188:21 213:6 252:10 253:4,19 improve 20:7 34:20 116:15 126:15 162:12,14 improved 90:19

91:4,5,6,7 126:18 136:16 162:15,16 improvements 98:3

212:12 238:11 improving 69:12 127:12 inability 182:12 inappropriate 72:8 Inaudible 151:2 190:3 193:7,9,10 236:11 incandescent 1:6,7

4:7 15:21,22 17:17,18 18:1,10 18:10,18,18 39:17 40:4 59:22 80:18 82:12 93:1 96:14 97:3,15 109:17,20 112:1,4,11 113:15 124:12 134:16 160:4 162:9 168:2 186:13 199:8 215:20 217:20 236:2 243:14 incandescents

43:13 75:3 175:15 213:17 incentive 76:5

245:9 incentives 130:8,15 inches 88:20 92:19 159:1 Incidentally 56:12 include 6:21 88:19 104:1 193:5 208:6 220:14 230:18 258:21 259:14,21 260:7 included 18:8 123:8,18 193:10 209:13 includes 24:12 including 20:21

28:3 81:17 88:6 137:7 203:13 219:20 245:12 inconsistent255:22 incorporate 11:12 incorporated 18:19 105:17 incorporates 31:13 incorporation 29:1 increase 26:8 27:18

28:21 38:6 75:10 98:8,16 109:18 118:21 129:14 169:1 198:16 236:1 237:18 increases 41:11

72:14 83:12,17 129:7,17 243:11 244:7,7 246:2 250:2 252:21 increasing 111:17 127:13,14,15 incurred 226:13 Independence 1:12 18:22 independent55:8

209:13 indicate 246:11 indirect 121:3

257:7 individual 9:10

34:20 99:5 210:18 individually 204:13 individuals 9:22

268:10 industrial 212:20

226:9 230:17 237:15 247:10 industry 17:20 18:20 20:11,16 22:22 24:9,11,20 24:22 26:14 27:15 28:18 38:10 39:12 39:14,18 50:4 69:10 103:18 110:22 111:21 122:18 167:22 191:14 207:14 248:15,18,21,21 249:5,9 250:13,17 254:19 infeasibility 96:21 influence 205:22 influences 69:20 information 7:17

8:2 16:11 23:11 26:20 43:3 53:2 56:14 66:22 70:22 71:13 107:7

### 202-234-4433 Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Page 284 117:21 128:4 129:20 160:16 209:11 214:11 219:2 221:4 225:21 227:11 231:13 249:7 263:13 informational

71:18 infrared 91:5 136:17 194:10 infrastructure

63:11 inherently 123:14 146:9 initial 46:11 57:22

61:4 73:3 83:14 148:13,18 150:3 150:10,15 155:2,7 155:9,11,13 156:15,20 237:1 initially 216:22 initiate 86:17 initiated 65:18 71:4

93:8 initiating 70:10

71:7 input 10:21 136:4,7

212:16 225:12 inputs 27:9 28:9

237:9,20 247:3 insert211:7 inside 97:6 insignificant 62:7 install 62:12 101:19 117:1 225:5 installation 117:3

224:3,21 225:3,6 225:7,11 installed 235:2

237:10,19,21 installing 161:17

218:12 instance 233:20 Institute 2:2 6:13

80:8 81:11 instructions 101:2 101:4 instrument27:1

28:6 41:1 integrally 135:9 intend49:18 95:2 intended 92:20 152:7 intensity 109:7 intent 142:13 intentional 145:17 interaction 55:21 interchangeable 120:1 interest 5:7 171:11

226:11 231:12,21 interested 3:7 117:15 148:11 159:13 205:21 interesting 81:5

83:10 239:7 255:1 interim 18:14 internal 75:19,20

251:4 internally 172:22 International 1:19

6:15 interpretation

95:18 interval 52:22 intervals 40:22

49:17 interview 248:22

249:10,12 interviews 249:8 intimately 30:7 intriguing 206:1 introduce42:6

67:13 introduced 130:22 introduction 100:11 introductions 3:2

5:13 invested 71:16 investigate 205:13 investment72:21 210:14 investments 73:10

75:17 Investor 2:2 6:20 invite 16:3,7 137:5 involved 116:2 involves 41:10,13 109:10 206:11 involving 211:15 IOUs 251:22 IR 193:19 194:15 IRL 16:2 19:13

22:13 31:12 32:1 32:4,9 69:16 82:14 88:9 89:11 90:10 94:22 104:18 107:21 108:4 110:5 116:16 124:7 136:12 137:6 159:6 168:2 181:10 198:12 250:2 252:3 IRLs 19:7 21:11

31:14 36:11 61:3 83:1 88:13,18,19 89:4,8 90:22 92:14 105:13,16 108:7,16,22 123:21 158:20 175:1 180:19 183:7 195:1 200:22 irrelevant 132:10 irresponsible 73:14 issue 13:12 21:15

24:3 36:20 38:4 43:5 47:9 56:8 66:13 97:22 105:21 110:6,20 124:9 127:7 128:4 128:18 132:6 147:14 170:14 172:16 176:2 182:22 183:1 188:22 194:6 196:17,19 199:22 201:9 204:6,11 208:8 218:7 226:22 227:19 246:7,8 253:5 255:4 261:3,15 267:16 issued 15:3 issues 9:9 12:8 16:9 16:14,17 22:7 47:20 51:8 60:19 68:14 195:18 203:14 263:20 265:8 item 192:22 260:13 items 10:12 261:22 J jagged 211:20 January 19:21 36:9

39:9,9 43:6 216:20 Joanna 1:23 7:2

86:8,9 104:15,16 166:7 178:9 job 78:14 189:17 189:19 213:7 255:3 jobs 98:18 John 17:9 joining49:10 104:10 jokingly 246:4 Journal 170:9,11 170:12 172:11 July 36:18 73:11

79:9 80:15 81:22 99:20 109:21 124:19 149:3 163:7 166:20 167:1,5,9 210:8 210:20 260:16 261:13 jump 81:12 132:5 jumping 161:22 June 20:2 35:3

78:14 170:4 Justice 6:11 82:22 83:4 94:20 justification 85:4 justified 92:1 justify 76:22 77:1 130:17 245:8 K Kaarsberg 3:3,17

4:14,15 5:2 10:15 10:19 14:13 22:3 22:6,6 23:2,7 36:21 43:8,15 65:6 125:9 142:6 169:17,22 170:10 171:4,12,15,19 200:16,20 206:16 207:17 219:6 220:9 221:10 232:6 245:20,22 251:7 265:10 266:13 KAARSBURG

1:16 keep 10:5 67:12

237:4 keeping 120:8 183:18 keeps 158:18 Keith 1:18 6:8 44:6

45:5 50:21,22 52:4 59:19 61:21 62:1 63:3 64:6,15 64:21 66:4 95:22 102:18 109:4,5 111:10 112:21 114:8 115:14 117:19 124:13 128:14 131:14 133:3 144:17,18 146:4 169:13 185:12 192:18,20 205:18 217:13 226:21 243:1 244:4 Keith's 103:13

113:12,13 Kelvin 90:15 141:7

### 202-234-4433 Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Page 285 141:10 198:9 kept90:16 184:5 key 19:19 26:19

68:14 206:20 kicking 243:6,12 Kienle 1:21 3:5 7:6

7:6 12:3 15:13,14 17:14 21:18 24:7 29:13,18 30:19 31:2,10 32:6 39:4 43:14 51:11 60:22 66:14,17,21 killed 125:6 200:1 kilogram 170:4,5 kind 13:19 15:2

30:5,21 36:7 42:15 43:1 65:10 80:11 81:10,12 83:5 85:18,18 100:10 114:20 147:14 163:3 183:16,21 191:2 193:17 206:3,7 211:21 221:13 229:8 231:4 233:14 235:20 238:20 239:10,20 246:10,11 251:4 252:22 kinds 146:11 208:2

220:22 knocks 204:8 know 13:6 14:14,15 14:18 17:11,12 19:19 36:13 37:15 54:21 56:5,16 83:15 85:8 94:1 111:3 113:1 134:22 138:3 149:17,18 152:18 154:4 158:8,10,17 159:13,22 160:5 160:12 161:6 165:5 166:9 170:5 170:16 176:20 180:8,13 188:2 190:12 195:8,11 199:18 201:2,13 201:14 206:14 207:2,22 212:6 214:6,10 220:1 221:7 227:5,18 229:12,13,16 231:5,12 233:4,5 233:15 236:8,20 238:20 240:5 241:2 242:11 250:14 254:5,7 259:8 260:7,9,10 260:17 261:4,7 263:8 knows 129:12 130:2 262:10 Kohl 1:22 7:10,10

12:18,19,21,21 13:22,22 14:9,10 17:6,9 58:19,19 95:6,6 104:22,22 170:8 258:17,17 259:7,11 260:1,4 260:9,11,21 261:3 261:7 264:7 Ku'uipo 1:19 6:14

35:8 36:5 38:12 45:2,12 47:21 134:20 150:14 L lab 181:12,19 label 186:3,22 labeling40:2 labor 62:11,12

225:4,10 246:7 laboratories 34:21

35:13,14,18 38:13 38:17 48:13,15,17 97:8 laboratory 37:18 labs 34:4,12,13,14

35:4,15 lack 29:11 77:20

221:1 240:7 laid 63:21 lamba 28:12 29:20 lamp 5:4 18:1 19:3 20:17 22:7 25:19 26:16 27:3,22 29:9,16 40:21,21 41:6,12 42:6,11 47:2 49:15 51:21 52:13,17,18 53:1 53:6,9 54:2 56:2 59:22 70:2 72:16 77:4,8 81:21 82:3 82:3 84:6 89:13 90:14 91:2,10,11 91:17,18,19 92:9 92:11 95:11,13 97:3,15 100:17 101:12 108:11,12 112:4,6 115:4 116:15 117:10 118:17,19 119:2 119:22 120:6 123:8,22 124:1 127:12 128:12 132:18 133:21 134:2,6,13 135:10 135:22 136:4 140:10 141:13,15 142:1,14 144:22 146:10 148:4,5,12 148:15,16 149:3 149:21 150:5 151:16 153:6,10 153:14,17 154:5 154:19,20 160:8 160:10,20,22 161:2,3,4 162:8 162:10,18 163:1,3 163:9,10 164:1,5 165:2 173:9,14,15 173:21,22 174:3 174:15 175:7 182:5,7 183:13 184:2 186:1,2 188:6,10 189:6 194:1,6 195:15,22 198:6 201:9,19 202:5 204:21 205:3,8,9 206:7 224:6,9 225:5,15 229:16 234:1,19 235:8,10,10 255:18 lamps 1:6,6,7 4:7 15:21,21,22 17:17 17:17,18 18:9,10 18:11,17,18,19 19:10 23:21 24:17 25:16,21 26:2 27:7 29:14 34:11 36:17 39:17 40:5 40:14 41:6,11,15 41:21 42:16 47:11 51:13,14,19,20 52:20 57:13 60:10 72:11 75:9 80:17 80:18 81:18,20 87:3,5 88:19 89:3 89:9 90:12,18 91:5 92:5,10,11 92:15 93:1,3,4,6 93:10,16 94:1 95:21 96:3,15,18 97:10,21 105:6,8 105:10 106:14,19 106:19,22 108:2 109:17,20 112:2 113:16 117:10,18 119:9,10,12,14,15 119:18 120:19,21 123:14 124:2,12 124:19 125:6,14 126:21 127:17,22 128:7 129:5 130:11,18 131:1,2 132:9,12,15,16 133:8,19,22 134:21 135:6 136:19 140:6,7 141:5,9,10,13,17 143:10,12,18,20 155:18 158:21 159:3,5,7,8,10 160:12 163:18 164:4,6,8,14 172:14,14 173:9 173:13,18,19 174:3,7,10,11,19 174:21 175:4,9 182:6,8,9,11,16 182:16,20,21 183:1,9,12,20 186:8,14 187:16 187:22 188:2,7,15 189:11 192:1,7,10 194:10 195:9,9,16 196:1,10,20 198:2 198:8,8 200:10,13 201:12,22 202:15 205:1 212:13 217:21 229:17 234:10,21 236:2 246:14 255:20 lamp's 126:8 lamp-for-lamp

245:12 landscape71:19 language 177:13

209:5 lanthanum 171:7 large 51:19 142:1 153:7 191:13 198:14 211:12 222:6 233:12 254:7 larger 62:19 112:12 195:8 largest79:6 lastly 76:7 late 13:20 74:20

78:5 latest24:14,19

25:14,17 26:7,18 27:19 laughing 260:18,21 Laughter 5:1 Laura 58:22 law91:1 183:10 layer 127:16 LCC 139:20 205:5

205:6 212:17 223:19 224:1,5,14 224:14,15 225:12

### 202-234-4433 Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Page 286 226:17 LE 23:7 lead 189:2 238:7,8 leads 188:13 leap 85:19 learned 209:5 leave 67:18 97:19 138:5,11 202:20 240:10 LED 76:1 246:6 LEDs 131:18

246:14 left223:1,16 legally 79:5 length 17:10 40:5 118:17 123:14 208:18 lengths 29:16 92:12 lens 121:3 201:17

201:17 lensed 121:10 letter 191:5 letters 23:8 let's 11:22 12:7 15:9 66:20 67:15 68:9 87:17 107:14 112:18 116:6 122:20 137:18 142:3 158:16 173:5 199:11,12 222:11 223:2,3 237:4 263:10 level 73:16 80:21

80:22 83:2 85:21 102:17 124:16 174:6,12 175:2,4 177:15,21 180:7 182:6 183:9,11 185:3 197:21 224:13,15 levels 73:7 80:20

84:3 118:10 132:20 140:13 147:19 174:1,8,14 174:20,22 175:8,9 176:6 179:8 182:9 182:15 184:4 191:8 197:20 198:11 LE6 23:6 life 37:9 39:16

47:11 52:15,18 53:1,7 57:18 66:8 82:6 83:16 133:21 134:6,13 139:19 163:2,9,10 181:14 210:9 214:22 223:16 224:6,9,12 226:19 257:2 lifetime 18:1 19:4 19:16 20:18 39:6 39:7,11 40:4,9,11 40:19 41:9,10,13 41:15,16,20 42:8 42:18,22 43:5,22 44:10 50:6 51:13 52:1 56:3 59:11 63:7,9,11,17 87:9 162:6,8,13,16,20 235:10 lifetimes 59:17 159:14 Life-Cycle 3:14 9:5 light28:13 32:13

72:12 96:3 97:13 103:3 108:13 112:6,9,15 118:19 118:21 119:2 133:11 134:4 148:13 150:3,10 150:15 156:14 158:16 159:9 162:12 188:20,21 213:21 215:5 229:7,13 231:5,17 232:9 235:9 246:5 246:7 lightbulb 230:4 lighted 108:18 lighting 1:18 6:3,9

22:10 23:2,4,14 39:21 91:12 106:18,21 112:1,8 114:16 119:16 120:20 121:7 156:19 171:8 194:12 207:14 213:9 214:2 215:12 218:13,21 219:19 220:11,13 220:21 221:17,21 221:22 222:1,7 230:21 238:17,18 240:14 241:2,8,9 250:20 252:19 253:10 lights 214:12 222:8 likewise 262:20 limit 10:6 limitations 182:11 limited 78:2 114:4 174:10 limits 193:21 Lindsay 87:1 line 19:22 46:3

64:22 87:1 99:13 104:10 114:9 131:1 132:8 135:17 136:6 181:14 190:14 200:19 210:15 linear 98:18 146:9 linears 146:7 lines 161:19 210:12

211:19 250:3 link 14:17 links 16:18 Liss 104:11 list 14:14 35:14

76:13 128:20 221:17 256:22 261:19 listed 76:9 91:17

93:2 131:17 141:5 212:21 237:9 242:20 listening 67:10 literally 249:22 literature 165:1

239:13 little 30:2,3,14,22 38:4 48:3 55:4,14 75:2 84:22 89:5 102:11 107:17 112:21 123:4 162:14 167:18 169:18 176:15 188:3 195:1,5 199:17 211:6 213:15 217:2 220:5 229:8,17 239:8,22 240:6 243:2 253:20 255:3 266:22 live 209:6 217:8 living 244:9 LM 24:18 26:17

49:13,18 LMs48:9 49:12 LM-20-1994 31:13 LM-45 24:19,21

27:20,21 29:2 30:7 LM-4940:12,17

48:22 LM-49-2001 39:15

48:18 LM-6 23:5 LM-9 24:20 29:2

34:5 35:10,13 LM4941:16 LM49-2001 48:10 loading 120:4 located 98:14

209:15 location 62:22

214:22 locations 62:21 108:13 locked 138:10 logically 54:1

255:21 logistics 266:21 long 55:19 79:5

82:19 152:21 163:2 207:21 longer73:13 130:16 133:2,21 134:1,6 193:19 long-term 148:1 172:17 look 5:9,9 21:12,17

32:8,9,12 35:18 38:4 47:12 55:20 59:1 78:8 83:19 95:21 116:19 120:3 123:13,13 125:10 143:7 144:20 166:19 167:21 172:16 176:7 180:15 184:17 188:15 191:11 196:7 208:3 215:19 217:15 221:11 229:18 236:21 239:19 240:22 247:5 253:1,14 258:20 265:17 looked 23:20 59:14

84:3 186:11 201:8 240:11 257:20 looking 22:7,8

32:13 50:12 66:12 80:15 83:20 84:11 85:20 92:3,10 107:3 110:3 120:7 125:17 147:5,7 153:9 160:2,16 170:1 176:8,14 177:22 178:2 183:17 185:21 190:11 196:10 199:8 207:4 208:8 218:19 264:11 looks 68:18 83:15 175:16 180:1 183:18 189:20 213:11 227:20 257:2,5,7 loop 115:18 202:21 loophole 105:11 132:22 loss 124:18 202:16

203:2 253:2

### 202-234-4433 Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Page 287 losses 202:20 lost 113:14 138:5 156:6 179:4 lot5:7 14:18 35:11

75:9 81:7 82:10 100:22 103:15 106:17,22 111:2,4 111:6 120:22 127:3 138:12 157:16 171:5 180:20 186:19 206:20 213:16 214:6,7 242:1 244:21 250:13 252:6 257:11 lots 220:20 263:3

265:16 louder48:3 107:18 low25:18,22 26:10

29:12 47:17 77:10 106:16 107:7 134:21 135:6,10 135:18 205:3,5 233:8,11 lower47:6,17

94:12 136:3 151:8 195:10 198:10 lowest 184:13 lumen 108:1 111:3 118:18 148:16 154:20 160:21 161:6 173:14 178:11,13 180:9 181:17 185:4,5 194:8 lumens 32:10 57:1

83:22 84:2,5,7 90:13 108:9 109:16,19 147:6 148:4,7,13,18 150:5 153:1 155:2 155:3,5,17,21,22 156:2,4,8,11,15 156:20,20 162:8 173:13 176:14 180:10,12 190:12 190:20 191:4,4 luminaire 220:11 luminary 108:11 luminous 108:14 lunch 3:11 8:18,21 137:15,19 138:2 170:1 Lutron 1:20 6:2 12:11 47:1 99:12 106:2 M machines 209:1 magnet 172:7 magnitude 98:8

215:8 MAHIMA 1:20 mail 67:2 mailing 14:14 main 24:20,22

27:19 118:3 127:5 225:12 maintain 26:13 124:20 253:15 maintained 152:5

253:9,10 maintaining 119:17 163:9 major 25:17 51:4

254:17 majority 91:11 132:8 133:19 makers 172:7 making 64:7 68:11

71:14 72:20 73:9 75:16 82:11 104:5 110:18,21 116:9 138:13 151:11 161:9 163:18 188:22 210:18 252:19 manage70:11

209:7 Manager 5:18 managers 129:3 managing 218:15 mandated 78:8 mandates 85:6 241:13 manufacture 62:20 101:19 116:22 191:12 204:2 250:13 254:14 manufactured 164:9 256:3 manufacturer

74:14 76:8 127:19 131:18 149:19 204:1 248:4,11,14 249:3,8,17 255:17 manufacturers 1:18 5:19 26:4 43:2 46:9 58:2,5 62:16,20 70:4 72:18 73:9,12 75:1,4,12,15 93:21 94:5 147:21 151:18 157:7,11 159:8,11 161:1 163:1,17 166:9 176:10 206:6 210:3,6 248:13 249:1,11,12 252:14,18 253:3 254:6 256:3 manufacturer's

87:13 manufacturing

61:12 62:22 139:20 149:10 207:8 248:17 251:9 margin 254:17 margins 253:9,9,15

253:18 market 3:9 8:17

44:13 46:13 56:2 57:15 58:12 76:18 81:13 83:18 94:14 105:11 106:13 107:7,8,8 116:9 116:12,16 117:14 117:18 118:3 127:18 140:11 153:7 159:16 163:2 166:14 170:6 207:5 212:2 213:12 215:13 216:2 235:7 244:15 marketed 120:22

202:8 marketing 148:12 marketplace 71:12

71:19 125:15 130:19 167:8 168:20 204:6,9 212:5 marking41:6 mark-up 253:7 mark-ups 253:5,11 mass 117:2 match 28:10 29:21 186:16 matched 148:5 matches 147:7 matching 144:2 material 8:7 15:12

29:22 102:5 materials 7:21 15:10 99:9 103:4 193:6 207:1,16 208:20 math 103:14 matter 66:3,5 110:21 172:6 258:10 268:19 matters 154:18 Mauer 1:23 7:2,2

86:9,9 104:16,16 105:3 166:8 178:10,21 Maureen 1:21 3:5

7:6 15:10,14 66:13 max79:22 80:22

84:13,15,21 85:20 85:22 111:14 174:6 175:8,17 176:8,17 177:1,14 177:17,22 178:2,6 179:9,19 180:2,15 181:2 183:9,11 191:17 maximum 101:5 140:14 174:5 179:15 180:6 194:14 McAdams 202:12

202:17 203:1 McGARAGHAN

2:1 6:18,18 21:3,3 33:11,11 45:21,21 63:2,2,9,15 65:22 100:6,6 101:22 102:3 106:9 112:20 113:2 121:19,19 122:15 126:2,2 132:3 135:6,9 157:3,3 162:4,4 163:12 164:3,21 165:11 167:11,14 179:6,6 189:16 190:4,7,10 192:9,14 194:5,16 201:7,7 248:7 251:21,21 266:5 mean4:22 13:11

26:22 32:8,11 34:10 43:11 45:14 46:8 53:12 57:14 62:21 78:22 84:10 99:9 111:4 122:11 130:19,21 131:10 131:11 134:21 135:16 148:18 155:3,4,17,21,22 156:1,11,19 158:8 171:3 176:15 177:20 185:1 195:20 199:9 219:12 240:15 245:18 249:22 meaning 58:14 117:1 means 37:15 67:16 149:18,19 202:4 225:9 measure 22:18,19

### 202-234-4433 Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Page 288 119:1 166:5 measured 26:7

27:18 28:21 38:8 52:20 108:14 150:10 190:20 208:20 measurement20:7

49:17 measurements

25:3,7 27:4,13 28:1,11,16 51:21 measuring 19:15

20:17 31:14 107:21 108:3 median 52:14,16

53:1,6,20 57:18 medium 25:21

52:18 83:22 84:6 92:16 95:12 104:11 146:16 148:4 163:21 174:12 198:8 205:3,4 meet41:18 46:3

70:12 75:17 131:1 131:2,3,5 143:19 166:12,20 167:8 168:3 185:3 202:9 227:6 meeting 1:5,12,13 1:15 4:5 8:11 9:21 11:17 15:17 15:19 43:18 93:13 114:17 115:4,7 176:2 186:20 204:15 265:6 meetings 90:1

266:10 268:7 meets 61:6 members 65:18

69:3,6 membership 64:18 mention 23:12

75:22 103:17 170:20 257:22 mentioned 17:14

20:3 25:14 46:17 51:11 57:21 76:19 92:22 107:16,19 108:10 140:21 141:14 173:16 174:18 197:19 198:5 208:12 258:7 266:6 mentioning 259:3 mercury 258:10 merging 94:22 met 1:12 27:5 28:2

91:4 115:9 143:11 159:4 160:22 174:13,14 188:8 metering 216:14,21 method 18:11 27:3

27:22 39:16 49:16 108:3 122:17 224:11 methodology 25:2

40:18 61:5 88:3 140:1 175:6 198:18 205:16,20 209:3 211:4,7 213:5 214:5,15 215:4 226:17 234:20 methods 191:6

205:13 metric 21:10,15,19

32:8 33:6,9 36:11 36:16 37:2,4 107:21,22 108:7 108:16,22 109:3 109:10,15 110:3,5 110:19 111:16,18 112:15,22 113:15 114:10 115:18 116:1,3 124:8 MIA 255:15 mic 10:17 microphone4:17

95:10 137:12 mics 5:21 10:7 middle 52:16 53:9

54:4 151:9 162:13 163:5 midmorning 8:1 midnight 67:5 mid-afternoon 9:1

9:4 mid-range 172:16 Mike 2:1 6:18 21:2

21:3 33:10,11 45:19,21 63:1,2 65:21 100:4,6 106:8 112:19 121:18,19 126:2 135:5 157:2,3 162:3,4 167:16 179:5,6 189:15 201:6,7 248:6 251:20,21 266:4 Mike's 255:12 Mimi 1:20 7:4 33:4

33:5 34:9 37:22 46:7 50:9 57:20 87:6 101:20 107:4 107:5 114:7,8 115:20 120:16 135:21 145:15 146:13 147:13 149:20 154:1 156:10 160:14 177:7 178:22 206:2 215:15,16 231:1 244:3,4 mind 30:14 54:13

55:20 72:15 162:18 200:10 208:18 209:1 mine 98:5 208:18 mines 98:4 208:15 minimally 148:14 163:15 minimally-compl... 149:3 minimum 39:7

51:14 52:12 57:13 59:11 87:3,4,8,10 124:15 154:4 mini-bipin 182:4 minor 55:14 103:12 minus 224:15 237:18 minute 132:13 168:1,8 minutes 223:3,9 misleading 217:17 missed 163:13

248:8 missing 84:12

85:18 101:16 144:19 145:1 211:5 misspoke 132:5 mistake 142:11,13 145:17,19 172:1 mistaken 185:22 mitigate 131:7 mix 234:11 mixed 144:14 mode 10:6 model 61:6,9,12 160:8 173:19 186:8 248:20 249:10 251:8,11 253:6 254:22 modeling 211:11

211:12,15 255:2 models 61:2 140:5

204:21 252:7 modes 42:6 modest 84:10 modifications

31:22 modified 198:12

202:1,5,8,14 modifies 27:3,21

28:3,5 modify 186:15 196:13 202:22 moment52:21 100:16 money 114:2 212:3

212:4 216:13 233:8 239:2 month 51:15 152:9

214:21 231:10 258:3 months 51:15 57:16 71:4 87:3 87:11 218:9 month-by-month

250:1 morning4:3,13

7:20 264:3 Mountain 207:15 move 8:6,11 10:12

24:4 91:8 126:13 131:10 133:13 136:10 158:16 169:15 173:7 182:1,2 192:17 203:10 212:8 223:8 movers 209:8 moving 39:3 87:16 116:8 136:12 139:14 162:11 204:18 234:6 256:19 MR-16 201:15,19 multimeter 27:10

28:9 multiple 62:20

204:5 229:11 233:19 multiples 98:7 multiplying 212:14 multi-photon 126:22 mute 11:16 266:8

267:5 mutual 115:19 N N 3:1 name4:10 5:13

9:19,22 15:13 22:5 35:7 87:19 254:12 nation 69:14 national 1:17 3:15

5:18 9:6 129:2 139:21 234:7,13 234:15 235:12

### 202-234-4433 Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Page 289 237:6 257:3,8 natural 242:3 naturally 55:5 Navigant 1:20,21 1:21 3:5,10,13 7:4 7:7,8 15:11,14 46:8 87:20 NE 160:4 near 189:12 246:17 nearest56:21 nearing 265:5 nearly 76:4 necessarily 163:7

240:2 241:12 necessary 26:15

32:5 128:8 157:19 necessitate 31:21 need 10:20 32:9,21

34:17 42:10 48:12 48:18 59:4 67:19 85:5 103:7 108:17 110:11 111:4,6 113:14 114:4 115:10 123:2 124:20 132:19 133:5 138:6 171:22 193:4 195:3 196:20 207:12,13,16 212:4,5 219:1 228:13 229:18 232:10 233:3 234:2 240:11,12 needed 76:21,22

78:18 79:2 102:6 108:4,13 225:4 needs 34:7 102:14 109:9,11 135:22 204:12 212:2 252:12 negative 243:5 NEMA 3:8 6:4 23:5

23:15,18 34:3 44:8 45:2 54:1 56:11 59:21 64:7 64:11 68:18 69:2 69:6,22 70:2 71:15 96:13 102:9 103:12,17 107:6 108:2 113:7,12 114:16 115:16 117:20 119:20 124:14 125:2 128:16 160:7 208:12 209:11,21 218:8,19 234:21 net 65:8 234:15

235:13 237:17 248:21 neutral 113:21 never4:21 46:17 160:2,5 165:6,7,9 177:2 181:12 182:20 184:2 216:4 new 17:22 21:10,19

32:8 33:6,8,14,17 36:11,15,16 37:2 37:4,4 39:5 42:6 57:15 61:2,8,12 81:17,18 85:8,21 93:9 99:19 109:10 110:3 111:16 112:14,22 113:14 113:17 114:2,10 115:5,17 124:7 131:1 154:13 162:17 164:16 165:2,12 166:21 204:4 208:17 221:3 223:22 227:5 232:1 239:1 239:5 243:6 244:13,14 253:18 newer247:8 NIA 205:5 212:18

234:17 nice 231:19 niche77:10,14 99:1 106:16 nodding44:1 158:3 nominal 150:17 non 59:3 nonlinear 92:10 nonprofitable 210:13 nonrepresentative 140:17 non-accelerated

42:22 non-halogen41:17

41:18 non-standard

92:12 NOPR 1:6 3:5,15

8:3 9:6 16:15,19 16:21 17:16 19:19 20:11,13,22 21:13 21:16 22:13 24:11 31:18 32:2 33:15 55:3 67:1 89:18 90:2 248:2 249:15 256:20 257:1 261:19 NOPRs 55:15 normal 161:8 normally 32:12 North 70:3 northeast218:11 Northwest2:3 6:17 note 14:8 16:21

26:9 37:15 46:8 67:3 71:1 99:14 120:13 122:22 123:6 136:15 174:16 177:8 182:3 187:19 noted 12:22 34:3

37:9 43:9 54:8 72:18 75:15 83:4 86:1 147:20 210:3 noteworthy 69:2 notice 1:5 7:21 13:17 14:16 15:2 16:3,11 37:16 80:20 82:21 240:4 264:13 notices 13:15 notified 249:22 noting 99:21 notion 52:13 November 17:2 67:4 264:6 NOx 258:12 no-end 78:6 NRDC 190:22 NSTAR218:10 NTAs 142:2 number 51:20,22

52:15 53:10 55:22 56:6 61:17 79:4 79:12,17 149:19 149:20 195:14 212:15 218:19 239:7,21 267:10 numbered 16:17 numbering 144:4 numbers 64:15,20

66:1 77:19 83:21 83:21 84:4,15 107:2 150:18 152:21 153:15,16 186:19 189:21 190:15,17 191:16 211:8 233:10 239:10,12 242:5 253:8 numerical 242:15 numerous 42:10

73:3 74:16 76:18 NVLAP 34:7,17

35:11 38:13,17 48:17 49:11 75:13 O object73:2 76:11

76:16 78:4 obligations 70:13 observed 74:6 obtain73:18 obtained 96:10 obvious 96:17 obviously 33:18

37:14 64:15 81:6 82:10,16 83:12 96:15 129:13 176:12 185:6 196:9 207:22 211:5 214:22 231:20 occurred 58:5 147:15 October 1:9 4:7

13:16,19 17:5 170:4 263:16 odd 52:15 53:9 offer73:11 130:16

210:7 232:18 offered 25:7 office 106:21 offices 240:5 officials 169:5 Oh 34:13,13 35:8

112:18 113:2 139:8 170:10 178:1 196:12 200:20 244:12 okay4:15 7:15 11:4 11:22 12:6,18,20 15:4,9,13 17:13 23:22 24:6,7 29:15,19 30:13,19 31:1,2,8,10 33:10 33:22 34:13,15 35:16 36:4 37:10 38:21 39:2,4 44:19,22 45:11,19 47:12,14 49:9 50:8,14,17,18,21 51:7,10,11 52:5 53:17 54:6 55:16 56:15 57:3 58:8 58:16 59:19 60:13 60:18,21,22 63:1 63:14 64:13 65:4 65:21 66:9,16,19 66:21 68:5 80:22 86:20 87:15 99:10 102:18 104:8,15 105:3 106:6 107:4 107:13,15 109:22 110:22 112:17 114:7,14 116:5,6 116:7 117:22 118:2 120:12

### 202-234-4433 Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Page 290 121:11,17 122:14 122:17,20,20,21 123:20,20,21 125:7,8,21 126:11 126:13 128:21 132:1,4 133:3,12 135:3 136:9,10 137:9,10,19,21 138:5,15 139:2,10 139:11 143:6 144:8,12,16 145:2 146:22 152:20 153:20,20 156:17 156:22 157:1 158:13,20 161:13 161:20 162:2 165:10,11 167:14 167:15 169:11,13 169:21,22 170:22 171:20 173:2,4,6 177:19 178:8 181:5,22 182:1 183:3,6 184:6,15 184:22 187:7 189:14 190:4,10 192:5,8,14,15 193:11 194:4 197:5,9,15 199:3 199:15 201:5 203:3,10,11 204:16,17 209:17 215:18 217:12 218:4 222:11,13 223:4,15,19 227:2 228:21 230:22 234:5 237:6 238:12 239:16 240:15 241:3,17 242:17 243:21 244:20 246:19 247:1,14,21,22 248:10 250:8 255:5,10 256:5,8 256:19 260:3,5 262:12 263:7,17 265:4 268:15 old 74:1 older 242:2 OLED 76:1 OLEDs 131:18 OMB 238:1 omissions 137:7 once 14:16 15:3 19:2 20:5 51:3 209:7 217:10 246:21 oncoming 116:4 ones 36:19 59:13 105:14 125:11 137:2 171:3 203:7 207:14 214:1 254:11 One's 264:15 one-for-one 97:14 ongoing46:6 online 153:11,14 165:13 open 36:14 146:2 opening 3:3 8:9,12 10:13 12:1,2,7 15:5 operate 133:6 135:17 136:1 182:12 operated 134:2

213:21 operates 134:3 operating40:5

41:11,12 42:3,5 47:7 52:2 133:8 212:19 216:6,9 224:4,7,19 225:13 225:16 237:18 operation 133:20

212:15 213:20 239:3 operational 241:12 opinion 99:14 opportunities

262:21 263:3 opportunity 8:3,7

9:8 68:14 71:20 80:9 131:12 226:14 233:4,6 263:9,19 266:9 opposed 51:5 52:13 151:2 178:17 218:2 230:3 opposes 59:21 opposite 194:8 optical 121:13 optimizing 130:21 option46:9 127:10 134:1 175:17,17 176:8,22 177:1,17 178:1 options 72:17 116:14,18 117:7,9 117:11 126:14,16 126:17 136:12,14 137:6,9 140:11 174:2 176:6,9 180:21 order 19:9 26:12

62:6 63:18 70:12 76:21 179:15 201:18 216:15 245:16,17 orders 98:8 organization 212:3 organizational

5:14 orientation 27:6

41:5 original 79:19 Osram 1:16 6:7

165:1 ought 199:3 outlined 126:16 outlines 24:10 outlook 226:2

237:13 output 108:1 118:21 120:4,10 120:19 121:6 133:11 134:4 148:13 150:4,10 150:15 154:20 156:14 161:6 162:12 173:14 182:5,8 188:20 221:14 235:9 outputs 159:9 outset 8:10 80:5 outside 38:16 55:1

72:21 97:7 192:13 262:21 overall 59:21 99:3 102:11 232:22 257:8 overburdened 98:9 overlooked 74:20 overly 75:6 overseas 255:2 oversight252:22 overstate 215:8 overview 3:2,9 8:16 17:19 overvoltage41:11 overwhelming78:9 132:7 owing78:2 Owned 2:2 6:20 P P91:3 Pacific 6:21 package 56:3 118:18 229:17 packages 185:5,5 packet7:16 263:12 page 177:9 262:1 pages 68:19 paper 103:16 128:17 par 89:1 92:15 159:20 160:1 183:18 184:3 188:7 parabolic 89:1,2 paragraph 178:6 Pardon 248:5 PARs 110:9 part25:4 31:15

37:2 64:21 69:1 69:22 93:4 137:10 137:13 161:15 206:10 229:18 232:14 236:14 251:16,17 260:8 PARTICIPANT 11:1 50:16 267:22 268:4 participants 16:7 participating 11:6

267:11 particular 56:18

57:9 90:19 93:16 97:11 119:10 128:5 130:10 171:5,7 181:10 193:4 195:6,15 210:15 221:6 229:19 236:3 243:18 particularly 74:21

74:22 particulate 258:10 parties 117:15 partner 115:17 partners 207:21 parts 133:5 251:10 PARTY 3:7 PAR20 201:20 Pass 207:15 passing 192:6 patents 203:21 path 242:12 pathways 191:8 pay75:14 82:8

231:9 payback 3:14 9:5

82:19 212:17 215:1 223:17 224:16 226:17,20 paybacks 72:20

82:17 243:19 245:7 paying 98:16 peak 246:20 peaks 211:20 peek 242:20 247:18 Pekka 1:20 5:22

6:1 12:10 38:22 46:21,22 57:5

### 202-234-4433 Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Page 291 58:9 99:10,11 105:22 106:1 143:1 147:2,3 187:8,9 200:6 217:18 219:15 220:19 242:8,9 262:13,14 263:22 pencil 107:2 people 10:22 14:15

67:18 111:2 112:5 133:20 137:19 177:22 217:8,22 218:17 222:4 230:1 236:3,13 266:7,8,9 267:1,5 267:10,20 perceived 119:1 percent 32:15,16

37:17,19,20 38:14 38:15,15,19 40:7 44:10 45:5 52:2 52:22 53:8 82:14 92:8 98:16 106:12 106:13 129:8 145:10,10 146:15 173:15 198:7,10 198:13,16 199:11 199:13,19 200:22 207:8 213:12,15 214:2 218:16 219:10 220:15 221:6 233:7,7 236:15 237:14,16 240:17 percentage 92:6

99:3 214:12 231:18 232:2 235:7 percentages 129:9 perfectly 191:15 perform 62:6 121:22 122:9 209:1 performance 69:13

79:22 120:2 130:7 131:3 147:18 186:13 performance-rel... 118:8 performing 55:10 period 3:14 9:5 12:12 13:11 14:2 14:7,11 17:1,4 51:16 57:14 67:3 211:16 212:17 223:17 224:5,10 224:17 226:7,18 226:20 234:12,17 263:15 264:3 periods 82:19

264:5 permanent 172:7 permissible 79:5 perpetual46:1,5 personal 241:16 personnel 75:16 perspective 12:13

44:8 pertinent 64:16 PG&E 190:22 phase 8:11 249:4,6

249:9,11 phased 39:8 phases 249:3,15 PhD 1:16 Philips 1:18 6:8

50:22 62:1 109:5 Philip's 168:17 Phillips 144:19 190:15 201:14 252:16 phone 169:4 218:8

267:5 268:6 phones 10:6 266:8 phonetic 252:11 phosphor90:20

96:4,7 126:22 127:10,11,13,14 127:15,18,21 130:22 168:21 phosphors 100:13 126:20 127:17 128:2,6,8,10,13 phosphor's 127:7 photo 28:11 37:13 photometric 25:3 phrasing 113:13 physical 118:16 119:12 Ph.D 3:3,17 picking 223:15 piece 56:18 165:1 pieces 211:5 piggyback 206:17

207:6 pink 138:9 pin-base 123:16 pin-based 92:4,7 place 103:1 160:2 171:8 180:12 placed 57:15 places 179:12,17 placing 58:11 plan 9:14,15 19:20

21:14,20 154:16 planned 115:16 planning 88:4 123:22 126:15 127:1 136:13,21 143:15 145:21 154:8 159:3 166:10 204:21 225:20 plans 88:1 89:16,18 114:11 140:16 141:4 173:12,17 174:17 205:10 212:18 224:15 225:5,7,8 234:20 234:21 237:14 248:2,19,22 plant258:15 plants 103:5 242:2

258:1 262:7,8 play47:5 56:17

59:18 98:1 214:14 214:14 229:22 230:3 262:10 played 253:5 please 5:13,22 9:18

9:18 10:5,9 11:15 11:16 16:21 48:7 67:3,11,19 100:5 110:7 149:6 221:7 223:7 242:14 244:2 plow 102:14 plug 227:18 plus 57:17 224:3 point 33:12 37:8

55:14 78:3 86:18 94:16 97:17 101:6 103:13 104:4 106:8 114:1,5 123:9 127:5 129:19 161:16 163:4 187:18 193:18 201:3,8,14 211:16 221:5 241:18 255:13,13 261:17 262:5 263:1 pointed 128:15 pointing 164:22 points 70:5 94:13

96:13 101:16 policies 75:7 Policy 18:5 88:10 political 74:19 poor71:1 75:17

79:15 163:18 portfolio 228:8 portion 166:13 posed 262:16 position 95:14

97:11 103:19 positions 74:7 possibilities 176:10 possibility 108:5 possible 11:19

35:22 78:12 92:3 94:3 97:16 105:10 105:17 117:2 148:22 191:3 214:5 220:18 235:21 237:1 254:22 possibly 81:1 post 143:9 postal 67:2 postulation 210:1 potential 21:10

62:3 72:17 179:15 182:11 193:9 202:21 212:11 potentially42:5

79:7 85:20 105:12 124:7 154:12 174:10 189:1 power27:10 28:5

62:10 91:1 108:16 183:10 194:11 212:14 235:9 258:15 262:7,8 powered 136:6 powwows 114:17 practicability 116:22 practical 77:7 practice 74:6 practices 20:12

31:20 prearranged

266:19 preceding 256:12 precise 25:7 27:13

28:16 predictions 128:11 preface47:1 prefer 53:5 112:5 preference 105:4 preliminary 5:6 10:11,14 12:1,4 23:9 38:6 46:12 69:20 85:10,14 89:17 90:2 92:5 99:18 196:18 249:6,8 261:14,16 premature 72:8 102:7,11 133:10 prepare 249:9 prepared 106:4

212:3 preparing 103:17 prescribed40:7,10

### 202-234-4433 Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Page 292 prescribes 40:19 prescribing 39:7 present 1:14 15:19 16:1 88:1 226:6 234:16 235:13 237:17,19 248:22 presentation 7:21

8:14 15:10 16:13 89:9 90:8 142:22 143:8 187:20 presented 81:15 presenters 266:17 presenting40:16

87:21 presents 88:8 presiding 1:13 press 31:9 242:1 pretty 8:20 10:8

83:4,5 100:18 101:2 102:15 127:5 170:17 171:3 187:18 191:5 213:14 216:16 233:11 prevent71:7 119:13 previous 58:20

59:5 70:9 75:18 146:14 154:21 177:17 178:3 187:15 previously 51:12

66:15 92:22 151:14 price 3:12 8:22

72:3 73:17 81:15 82:13,15 83:12,17 94:13 129:5,6,16 130:18 139:15,18 153:11 168:11,12 169:1 204:18,19 205:4,6,8,12 206:8 210:2 224:3 224:21,22,22 225:18,19,21 236:1,6,22 237:1 243:10 244:6,7 246:8 250:2 priced 168:11 prices 72:18 83:14

98:7 127:21 128:10,12 129:12 130:20 153:9 170:2,18 172:18 204:21 205:1,3,9 205:14,17 206:6 206:15 225:1 226:4 228:1,10,19 237:21 243:5,16 249:21 pricing 73:6 127:8 131:9 212:1 primarily 173:17 primary 97:4 prior 61:7 98:22 probably 9:12 81:8

95:20 100:8 129:10 142:17 145:13 167:18 202:2 206:17 216:22 220:10 232:21 233:11 problem 60:4

74:21 96:6 103:1 166:1 205:20 220:6 260:2,11 problematic48:12 162:1 procedural 266:5 procedure 1:5 3:5

7:22 8:4 15:6,20 16:3,15,21 17:16 17:22 18:4,12 19:13,15 20:7,17 20:22 21:2,8,12 21:17,21 22:17,21 31:12,15 32:1,4 32:11 33:9,14,17 33:20 34:22 36:17 37:5 39:5,11,19 42:19 43:16,17 48:13,14,16,20,21 49:8 55:21 58:7 63:4 67:4 87:8 122:3,4,10,17 232:22 264:16,19 procedures 4:6 12:9,12,15 13:14 18:16,19 19:2,6,9 20:5,14,20 21:13 23:1 24:21 25:1,9 50:5 85:9 109:2 proceed 15:9 55:6

64:8 95:2 101:3 102:8 106:7 107:14 112:18 116:6 122:20 139:3 173:5 222:12 proceedings 37:5

68:6 138:16 process 20:6 71:7

93:14 95:4 102:11 116:9 128:16 161:8 procurement 169:4 produce 102:6 166:10 181:13 192:2 207:16 produced73:17 producing 98:15 160:12 161:7 181:20 product 3:12 8:22

40:1 44:9 45:9 46:14 51:3,4 58:3 58:12,15 69:12,13 72:11,17 73:5 77:3 78:1,16 79:9 79:21 80:2 81:6 96:22 98:17 99:8 106:11,16 116:13 117:16 118:4,6,8 118:12,16 119:6,8 119:11,18 121:21 123:1,6,10 124:2 124:4,6,11,21 132:14,19 139:15 140:3,4,8,17,22 141:1,8,16 144:6 145:22 146:17 163:4,5,20,22 165:6,19 167:3 172:8 174:4 179:19 190:14,20 191:1 197:20,22 201:15 202:16,18 202:21 204:2,18 204:19 205:16 210:2,2 224:22 225:3 226:14,15 229:16,19 233:3 234:3,11 235:2 238:9 250:3,15,19 252:3,4 253:12,13 production 51:15

57:14,17 117:2 161:19 181:14 products 18:7,13

36:10 57:15 58:4 63:19 64:2 65:1 73:11,12,15 75:21 76:2,6,9,10,13,19 77:5,8,10 78:12 79:2,8,18 80:1,19 82:16 83:8 85:1 93:20 94:1,9,12 94:16 96:8 98:6 104:5 106:11 107:3,9 114:3 120:1 124:17 130:10 133:2 147:17,18,21 148:22 149:1 152:4,6 159:15 161:10 162:15,19 163:6 164:17 165:12,15 166:10 167:8 168:2,4,17 168:17 180:9,22 188:11,14 190:13 190:16 194:11 197:18 202:7 210:7,15 227:6 229:9 236:17 239:1 252:9,14 253:15,17 254:5 256:1,2 professional 55:1 77:6 professor 55:2 profile 249:5 profit254:19 Program 18:7 programs 218:10

245:9 progress 116:3 138:13 project2:1 7:3

206:15 218:15 242:11 243:3 projected 20:1 129:16 159:7,10 214:9 225:19 236:15 projecting 242:12 projection 74:3 129:10 projections 72:21

73:4,20 74:1 77:5 77:16 172:17,17 210:10 226:3 228:2 242:7 projects 90:17 91:3 promised 68:13 proper23:10 proposal 23:8

39:10 52:9 61:13 87:10 122:16 137:2 proposals 70:22 propose 51:17 154:22 proposed 1:5 7:22 15:19 16:1,4,11 24:8 25:10 29:1 32:1 39:5,11 40:19 60:8 61:1 73:7 75:10 83:2 84:3 104:20 110:3 131:5 182:6 205:16 258:5,19 259:4 proposes 20:13

24:11

### 202-234-4433 Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Page 293 proposing 17:21 18:2 20:15 24:18 25:12 26:17 39:15 40:3,10,13 41:8 46:2 51:12,14,22 57:22 63:16 145:21 180:2 proprietary 190:21

203:13,21 204:3 204:12 267:15 pros 189:18 prototype 116:22 180:22 prove43:18 proven 181:13 proverbial 78:6 provide 16:7 17:19

25:1 26:15 27:13 28:16 55:6 56:14 65:8 68:13,22 77:17,18 117:21 118:17 157:5 220:3 245:17 provided 16:19

25:8 39:20 49:19 118:19 257:12 provides 24:15

25:15 26:19 41:1 66:22 119:3 219:10 263:13 provision 38:11 provisions 45:4

61:10 71:6 public 1:5,15 3:4

4:10 12:11 15:16 15:18 90:1 93:13 103:22 157:19 204:15 212:6 261:11 publication 14:4,21

31:17 86:2 publicly 217:10

249:7 publish 19:21 36:9

89:16,18 259:9,12 261:5,10 published 13:1,9 14:9,11,16 16:22 17:3 19:20 31:19 33:13 89:6,16,21 93:12 100:1 188:6 215:19 260:16,18 publishes 188:16

258:18 pull45:9 95:9 pumps 236:10 purchase 81:15,17

82:13 189:1 224:21,22 226:13 226:15 229:7,9 231:18 233:12 234:1 purchases 244:11

244:12 253:17 purchasing 232:9

244:9 pure 110:7 purpose 15:16,18

43:17 87:22 109:15 116:12 156:8,13 212:9 234:8 248:10 purposes 94:2 151:22 239:4 pursue 69:11 pursued 34:8 pursuing 108:21 put 11:16 15:1

21:20 66:20 97:2 131:19 186:22 212:5 213:18 229:11 230:2 239:1 252:7 putting 59:11 128:16 P-R-O-C-E-E-D-...

4:1 p.m 138:18,22

223:9 268:18 Q qualitative 251:13

251:17 255:14 qualitatively 249:14 quality 22:20 37:19

70:21 79:15 quantified 108:12 quantifies 28:12 quantitative 247:6 quantitatively

249:13 quantity 118:19

191:13 question 10:16

17:6 21:5 29:6,20 37:13 45:20 49:22 56:11 58:20 59:6 60:5 65:7 87:2,7 104:9 112:20 115:2 120:15 121:22 134:21 141:22 142:9 143:2,4,6 147:4 149:10,16 150:9 151:6 178:11 215:11 220:3 232:7 235:15 244:1 248:6 250:12 251:2,4 259:18,19 264:2 265:14 266:6 questionnaire

249:10 questions 9:15 11:9

29:6 31:5 60:18 67:10 191:16 262:16 268:6,11 QUESTIONS/DI...

3:16 queued 227:16 queuing 9:22 quick 13:6 131:16

178:10 199:6 223:2 262:5 quickly 68:4 127:5

170:18,19 219:18 267:14 quit217:22 quite42:20 64:14

65:13 142:10 187:10 206:1 233:3 242:6 261:20 267:2 quoted 106:12

171:7 220:13 239:13,19 quotes 81:4 R R25:5 26:5 31:16 racheting 258:14 rack 62:8,12 racks 62:6 radiation 127:14 raise 9:10 16:8

68:15 130:20 263:19 265:8 267:20 raised 105:14

255:14 raising 226:12

267:3 ram 192:12 ramp 99:2 range 57:1 129:7

136:5 140:13 151:7,8,9,10,12 171:6 196:8 198:10 215:1 246:16 ranges 205:4,6 rank 52:16 rare72:4,7,14

90:20 96:3,7 97:22 98:13 100:12,15 103:3 103:19 106:20 127:7,16,18,20 128:6,8,10,12 131:8 168:21,22 169:19 170:3 193:6 205:22 206:5,5,18,19 207:9,9 209:14,21 243:10 rate43:12 52:19,22

53:8 226:5,8,10 231:12,21 233:21 237:13 238:4,6,17 238:21 239:22 240:1 241:10 rated 39:7,20 40:3

40:9,11,20 42:4 42:17 47:6 52:1 91:2 92:17,19 126:8 132:18 148:5 149:17,22 150:2,4,19,20,22 151:15 154:19 157:5,13 158:9 178:14,17 187:16 rates 227:11 229:3

237:22 240:13 rating 132:11

212:14 235:9 ratings 122:13

158:22 181:17 rationale 147:11 ratios 232:8 raw99:8 RDC 141:22 reach 55:7 193:18 reached 65:2 reaction 83:11 read 68:20 215:22

216:3 252:12 reading 30:1 68:21 reads 49:11 ready 67:7 103:20

115:1 169:15 182:1 real 157:14 160:11

181:14 185:17 205:19 226:22 234:4 238:21 262:20 267:14 realize 82:5 really 21:7 23:10

43:9 59:18 60:11 64:3 65:7 68:19 84:7 85:3,11,16 85:18 99:5,20 131:9 138:12 154:17 157:22

### 202-234-4433 Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Page 294 158:5,8,11 161:21 171:9 175:18,21 176:17 177:16,22 180:6 185:16 186:1,20 191:20 194:10,11 195:14 195:17 196:1,6,21 197:3 204:14 206:19 213:6,8 228:15 229:7,17 233:2 234:1,2 240:13 251:8 252:10 253:8,18 258:8 262:15 265:12 267:2 realm 211:21 reason 30:20 42:7

112:7 113:14 162:17 169:6 236:7 reasoning 184:1 reasons 196:16

261:1 rebound 237:13

238:3,6,17,21 240:1,6 241:10,16 247:7,9 rebuttal 74:4

103:12 receive 90:1 128:5 received 7:16 86:22

170:2 recess 223:12 recognize70:10

133:5 recognized 35:18

49:18 recognizing78:13 recommend44:8

96:4 211:3 recommendation

49:19 50:13 64:7 recommended

49:16 reconsider 124:6 record 9:19 68:7,8

138:17,18 139:2,9 141:18 142:4 144:9 148:17,19 158:19 168:9 187:3 190:6 192:4 199:2 212:6 223:11,15 247:19 267:10 268:11,17 recoverable 128:1 RECS 213:6

214:10 red 136:20 137:1 redact 157:19 redeposits 42:1 redesign 99:7

188:10 210:14 redesigned 96:17

96:18 reduce 20:8 reduced 25:20 26:1

29:14 130:13 131:2 134:3,4 159:8 174:9 182:7 182:10,16,19 183:1 192:7,10 reducing 183:19 reduction 65:1

72:17 146:16 188:14 198:7,9,14 198:15 200:22 202:14 reevaluating

107:21 refer74:6 89:8 reference 18:20

26:11 27:1 31:13 39:15 126:7 209:16 216:12 221:5 228:14,16 referenced 24:20

24:22 31:15 39:22 60:9 219:8 239:15 references 20:16

24:13 25:3,13 239:19 referred 108:4

219:5 referring 63:5 164:22 refers 87:7 refined 216:17 reflective 23:20 reflector 1:7 15:22

17:18 18:10,18 80:18 82:12 88:22 88:22 89:1,2 91:6 93:1 94:1 97:10 97:12 105:6,8,10 109:17,20 112:2,4 113:15 124:12 136:16 186:13 188:15 189:6,11 190:21 217:20 236:2 reflectors 109:2

112:11 215:20 243:14 refueled 242:3 regarding 12:11

40:17 54:10 61:13 61:18 69:3,15 70:5 96:14 97:7 108:21 128:4 131:16 193:1 210:2 221:1 224:19 264:3 regardless 126:7

132:15 153:14 165:13 190:11 regards 35:10

49:15 74:4 76:8 regenerative41:22

47:4 region 205:11 Register 13:2,10,18 14:10,12,19,21 37:16 80:20 105:2 258:19 259:13 264:13 regs 38:20 regular40:22

167:13 181:14 regulation 26:22

28:4 69:12 75:11 78:2 263:1 regulations 40:1 93:8 131:6 255:19 256:1,4 regulator 62:9,13 regulatory 5:17

18:4 74:18 78:5 88:6,8 203:14 248:17,20 255:16 257:9 related 8:7 12:9

14:21 15:5 22:7 23:13 179:10 197:17 203:6 209:21 relating 80:12 relations 98:12 relationship 128:11

139:17 206:8 relative47:10

65:11 163:19 relevant 108:19

241:2 Reliability 53:3 reliable 117:3 relooked 130:21 remain 38:17 117:7 remaining 87:12

224:9 remarks 3:16 4:13

8:9,9,13 9:11 12:1 12:2,7 68:14 98:22 remember 106:20

146:15 199:22 220:17 remembering

188:19 reminds 115:21 remiss 11:7 remove 79:13

126:6 230:1 removed 133:18 removing 133:21 renewables 228:12 renewals 242:4 renewed49:1 renovation 224:1 244:16 rep 210:18 repeat49:21 repeated 62:21 replace 81:21 82:5

109:16 112:6 161:3 185:4 217:21 replaced 213:16

215:6 242:4 replacement97:15

155:21 160:21 185:11 189:5,6 224:1 233:19 245:13 replacements

112:1 119:14 155:16 165:16 173:8 185:3,6 replacing 230:4,6 replying 96:20 report46:12 58:6

61:5,10 151:21 207:1 224:16 reported 147:20

148:2,6 151:16 157:6,12,16 174:18 reporting45:8

55:22 56:6,9 75:8 152:8 reports 148:7

174:17 239:14 represent52:17

77:5 152:22 191:17 251:11,14 representations

43:21 representative

140:3,4,8 141:1,5 141:8,16 142:14 144:6 159:15 160:6 197:22 representativeness

20:8 representatives

122:19 159:2

### 202-234-4433 Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Page 295 represented 70:3

80:2 175:7 183:11 251:15 represents 52:14

150:3 153:7 request 12:22

23:11 31:4 261:22 264:5 requested 17:10 requesting 257:14 requests 13:7,9

20:19 28:22 32:3 61:13 117:15 143:21 182:14 246:21 require 26:10 27:4

27:22 36:16 42:10 49:7 51:14 57:13 118:9 174:9 required 19:1 20:4

45:7 51:3,21 60:1 60:3 63:22 87:4 132:17 143:13 210:14 242:11 requirement28:10

44:5 49:20 59:12 requirements 19:4

20:1 27:14 28:17 39:8 56:17 59:22 60:9 61:2,14 63:21 72:10 87:8 requires 20:6 40:21 requiring 124:18

241:8 research 37:18

76:5 92:5 190:19 residences 215:20

216:3 residential 81:6,9

81:13,19 82:9,18 83:9,13 111:5 176:19 212:20 213:5,10 214:17 214:19 215:2,7 216:7,14 218:10 221:2 225:2,8 226:9 236:19,20 237:16 239:6,22 240:18 247:10 residual 224:8 resources 70:12

114:4,20 240:20 respect 82:22 respond 106:4 response 15:7 24:5

27:1 28:12 31:6 43:10 51:9 60:20 64:11 66:11 100:10 127:19 183:5 198:21 203:9 246:22 247:13 256:7,10 responses 238:8 responsible 214:1 responsibly 103:21 responsive 24:3 responsivity 37:14 rest 87:12 restart79:20 restarted 208:16 restricted 79:18 restrooms 68:1 result27:12 28:15

60:7 75:6,10 91:21 124:17 173:16 243:17 resulted 206:8 resulting 159:14 results 46:13 118:3

139:18 140:17 218:1 224:13 247:8 resume 67:17 68:4

223:8,15 retail 231:14 retired 242:2 retrofit72:20

244:18 retrofits 130:9,17

131:11 return72:21 returning 223:18 returns 263:2 revenue 253:3 review7:18 8:8 18:3 19:1,12,18 19:19 20:4 32:11 89:11 90:10 95:15 95:19 reviewed 19:5 reviewing 15:16

91:15 revise 14:1 19:2 revised 19:6,8

31:18 123:2,7 revision 19:12,14

49:2 89:7 revisions 137:7 rewards 231:6 reworked 79:13 re-explain 30:15 RFI 22:10 23:3

220:11 rid 78:21 166:4 right5:14 11:2

33:14 43:12,14,15 45:18 46:9 54:5 68:15 69:4 84:18 85:10 97:13 98:19 100:9 101:17 102:5 103:2 109:17 111:12 113:4 115:8,12 124:14 125:17,22 125:22,22 131:17 136:11 139:11,13 145:8 146:5 148:12,20 149:2 151:4 152:11 155:4,12 158:20 168:6,10,13,18 180:1 185:21 188:19 190:11 192:18 196:8 199:1,20 202:11 206:13 207:7,15 207:17,17 210:10 230:7,8 233:6,8 244:17,17 246:14 254:20 256:21 260:22 261:5 266:18 267:3 right-hand 267:21 rise 172:18 rising 72:16,18

243:5 road 95:2 154:7

191:10 212:1 ROIs 243:20 245:7 role 214:14,15 Ron 50:19 Ronald 50:16,17 room 1:12 7:17

67:17,17 84:22 138:10 176:16 227:10 254:13 root26:21 Rosenstock 2:2

6:12,12 13:4,5,5 14:5 36:6,6 42:13 42:14,14 59:8,9,9 80:6,7,7 93:18,19 93:19 110:1,2,2 129:1,1 134:10,11 134:12,19 154:2,3 154:3 155:2 159:18,19,19 164:1,2 166:17,18 166:18 175:12,13 175:13 177:11,11 177:20 178:7,19 183:15,15 184:11 194:21,22,22 197:6 199:5,6,16 200:2 203:17,17 213:2,3,3 227:9 227:17 230:11,15 231:3,3,11 235:17 235:17 238:14,15 238:15 239:16 241:5,5,18 254:1 254:2,2,16,20 255:6 257:17,18 257:18 258:22,22 259:9 260:13 261:2,6,9 264:10 264:10,15,20 267:13,19 268:2,5 rough 92:21 round 132:7

186:18 252:1 rounding 56:20 RS 225:9 rule 18:14,15 19:14

19:21 33:18 36:9 36:14,15 37:8 70:9,16,18 71:5 71:10 72:2 73:21 74:10 78:22 80:12 80:16 81:15 86:12 86:15,17 89:6,9 89:19,21 90:12 93:4 99:19 100:17 101:12 104:5,20 108:2 116:4 119:9 119:11 124:3,15 125:5 126:21 127:17 129:15 136:19 141:9 143:12 146:14 147:7,9 154:4 159:5,7 166:19 167:4 174:7,11,21 175:4,9 180:20 182:7,10 183:9,12 186:11 188:5 190:7 198:3 199:1 205:1 234:21 236:10 243:6,12 258:2,6,10,12,19 258:19 260:16 261:4,8,12 rulemaking 1:5

7:22 16:4,12 19:11,14,18 23:10 33:7,8,13,21 54:14 69:19 70:8 70:11,14 71:3 72:13 73:2 74:9 74:22 75:18 77:1 78:10,17 79:5,21 80:11,16 81:2 83:7 84:18 85:20 86:12 88:5,14 89:10 91:17 92:2

### 202-234-4433 Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Page 296 93:9,12,14,15 95:1,1,3,8,21 96:20 99:13 101:11 102:9,13 102:14 104:2,19 105:18 106:3 107:20 108:6 109:14 111:13 120:22 122:4,17 127:2 129:11 133:22 135:11,19 136:22 143:21 145:20 147:15 152:19 154:21 155:1,20 157:5,22 175:5 177:18 179:22 180:5,14 181:3,9,11 184:9 184:14 185:2 187:15 188:1 197:2 208:1 209:12 230:20 234:10 248:3 rulemakings 16:6

54:12 74:17 94:4 94:7 101:3 102:22 176:3 195:3 232:11 241:22 rules 78:21 102:21

103:6 131:3 232:1 258:1,6 ruling78:7 run 62:10,14 136:2 running 35:4 R&D 75:22 114:1 131:19 S sacrificed 189:3 Safe 268:16 safety 97:8 98:3 101:21,22 117:6 192:6 196:16 sake 98:2 sale 58:20 245:16 sales 75:9 79:10

205:11 225:1 243:4,7 244:6 252:21 253:2 sample 39:12 40:7

40:10,14 51:12,17 52:3 87:4,8,12 196:20 216:19 samples 52:16

53:10 87:11 181:11 sampling46:10,15

58:4 60:8 61:10 San 6:22 satisfy 77:13 91:11 save48:1 99:5

220:15 233:7 239:1 saving 130:13

238:10 262:20 savings 73:20

76:22 77:19 81:7 91:21 96:9 99:3 103:9 131:12 134:5 173:16 212:11 215:8 218:17 219:11 220:21 222:9 224:14 234:15 235:12 237:7,18 238:7,7 saw71:10 165:1,20 saying47:1 50:12

53:15,18 57:12 64:1 146:18 151:13 153:18 167:2 168:1 169:6 170:12 180:13 193:17 217:18 220:13 233:9,10 233:21 266:18 says 12:20 36:8

56:3 82:13 104:14 154:4,11 177:14 179:17 213:19 231:4 252:12 scalable 195:17 196:1 scale 140:16 145:21 195:8 211:12 254:8 scaling41:14 42:9 145:6 146:3,6 187:21 188:1 195:6 196:21 197:3,18,21 198:2 198:18,20 199:14 200:11,20,21 201:10 203:6,8 scan 193:14 197:10 scattered 207:11 scenario 37:1,7

49:6 228:14 252:7 scenarios 207:5

208:3 223:22 228:15 schedule 36:8 104:18 138:14 258:4 scheduled 137:14

208:16 schedules 260:22 scope 3:9 8:16

76:15 79:17 88:7 91:8 104:12 135:1 253:20 screen 11:10 101:18 116:18 127:1 136:21 137:2 268:1,3 screened 101:9,13 126:22 136:20 screening 3:10 8:17 102:4 116:10,17 117:8 173:11 179:11,14 screw 92:16 104:11 script 68:21 searching 219:3 second 8:11 27:2

28:2 29:19 72:1 89:11 93:2 175:1 200:19 211:10 212:22 224:4 225:12 239:21 241:18 249:14 Secretary 78:20 section 26:4 37:11

70:2 115:4 133:1 250:14 sector 81:9,10,19

82:17,18 83:9,13 213:5,10 214:17 215:2,7,9 217:3 225:6,8 236:20 238:20 239:6 240:18 sectors 77:6 78:16

212:21 216:2 225:2 226:10 237:15,16 240:14 Security 19:1 see7:19 8:19 31:4,7

33:19 35:1 54:3 56:2 68:5 80:11 83:11 104:19 105:2,9 107:1 120:6 121:11,15 124:20 131:22 153:13 157:17,20 158:2 175:15 177:19 184:19 186:2 191:2 211:17 221:21 229:11 230:3 233:19 235:20 242:19,20 243:5 244:20 246:17,18 247:2 253:6 255:1 260:4 261:19,21 263:22 seeing 84:4 129:6 150:1 243:9 244:21 245:6 246:2 252:20 seeks 61:17 seen42:16 159:22 160:3,5 172:11 177:2 184:2 185:22 186:17 195:2 197:2 241:22 244:5 segment 68:12 137:18 select 140:9 173:8 sell 149:3 159:8,11 161:2,3 selling 59:4 149:2

231:16 semi-annual 114:17 send 14:8,16,17

67:11 sense 22:12 30:16

38:13 65:11 74:10 94:14 95:20 152:7 156:1 166:14 233:16 sensible 69:11 sensitivities 205:7 sensitivity 109:6

236:21 241:20 sent55:4 separate 93:14

95:3,7 118:11 119:11,17 120:8 121:20 132:11,19 separately 226:8 September 16:22

17:3 19:20 89:16 89:17 99:15 102:10 261:15 series 47:20 51:8

66:10 90:19 230:9 serious 212:4 serve 94:1 service 1:6,6 5:3,4 15:20,21 17:16,17 18:1,9,9,16,17 24:16 40:4 72:10 77:4 80:17 91:10 92:21 96:2 117:1 166:22 servicing 117:3 serving 119:13 set 14:20 18:11

43:5 74:5 89:3,13 90:11 93:9 95:13 101:2 105:10,16 109:21 111:14

### 202-234-4433 Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Page 297 124:15 126:9 147:19 148:2,8 152:5 174:14 183:9 187:17 195:14,20 204:7 207:22 217:19 227:6 256:3,8 257:13 setting 62:5 90:4 115:17 settles 71:19 setup 27:2 40:18 seven 19:3 20:5

51:15 57:16 60:8 87:3,11 90:3 100:22 101:1 125:18 146:15 195:16 196:1 seven-month 57:14 seven-year 19:13 severely 248:15 shaking 122:19 shape 118:17 261:7 shaped 146:10,18 shapes 89:3 92:16 146:11 share 10:10 76:18 106:13 107:8,8 153:7 213:13 235:7 shares 117:18 sharp 112:8 shed 158:15 sheets 144:10 shelf 160:1 shelves 45:10 shielded 121:2,4 shift 8:6 202:19

252:7,9 253:16 shifting 252:6 shifts 250:20 251:3

255:3 shine 194:10 shipment 3:15 9:5 141:2 234:6,9,14 234:17 235:4,6 236:11 shipments 92:6 117:16 234:9,19 235:1,18 236:9,14 237:20 252:4,8 shop 68:2 short 33:18 55:9

67:12 98:17 172:15 191:20 193:3 216:9 223:12 shortage 100:13 shortens 41:12 shorter 123:14 show 177:13,21

219:12 showed 144:21 188:19 showing 249:2 shown27:20 84:21

85:17 91:14 119:6 124:5 129:10 136:14 143:11 147:8 159:14 175:9,19 176:1 195:16 201:21 shows 59:3 90:3,5

99:13 139:22 141:12 183:10 shrink 194:1 shrinking 253:2 shut210:12 shutting 103:4 side 55:10 82:12

87:16 sidebar 10:7 sight78:7 sign 247:9 signal 11:20 signed 10:22 significant 27:17

28:20 51:6 60:2 61:16 62:3,17 63:18 80:16 83:8 83:17 86:3 100:17 106:15 129:14 166:13 188:14 196:9 228:18 242:15 244:5 258:14 significantly 38:7

47:6 75:8 82:19 94:11 112:2 129:9 129:15 147:10 188:21 189:3 242:6 signing 265:21 silent 10:6 similar40:11 61:3

89:2 92:16 124:2 145:20 155:22 156:14 159:9 174:7 183:7 199:10 simple 224:16 simply 73:18 96:22 139:3 203:5 single 215:5 265:14 site-to-source

237:11 241:19 sitting 208:14

254:13 situation 72:6

77:21 96:4 100:15 103:18 105:5 131:8 189:2 six71:4 91:16 125:20 126:1 146:14 sixth 78:4 six-year 95:15,19 size 39:13 40:7,10

40:14 51:12,17 52:3,12 87:4 97:1 192:7,10 194:1 247:9 skews 253:8 skip 69:22 85:9 skipping 263:11 slated49:1 slide 16:20 18:3 19:17 24:10 27:20 29:7 40:16 57:20 66:18,20,22 88:8 99:12 119:7 126:17 127:5 136:14 139:22 143:11 144:20,21 160:15 175:15,18 175:19 182:3 183:7,10,16,17,17 203:5 206:5 237:5 247:1 249:2 256:12,14 263:10 263:12,13 264:12 slides 10:14 11:11 12:2,4 61:20 90:9 137:18 144:2,3,14 163:13 180:19 197:18 223:1 257:13 sliding 189:21 slight 144:3 186:14 slimline 84:1,9 176:13 slower246:2 small 61:17 62:16

75:4,9,12 76:18 96:9,10 198:14 201:1,8,12 smaller74:22 192:11 194:6 195:9 200:9,13 201:19 203:1 SoCal 7:1 socket 188:17 sockets 62:9 software 267:16 sold 73:17 159:16 sole 109:15 solid 108:15,19 110:8 111:22 112:6,7 113:17 181:18 250:20,21 252:19 253:10,17 Solutions 1:15 2:1

3:4 4:10 6:19 100:7 somebody 30:3,16 152:18 250:20 somebody's 218:22 somewhat57:2 soon 8:8 105:10,16 sooner44:13 sophisticated 110:4 110:13,19 sorry49:22 65:22 123:5 137:13 139:5 150:11,14 158:17 164:1 178:7 192:9 221:9 230:15 248:7 264:16,17 265:13 sort22:20,22 54:18

63:16 65:8 99:17 114:9,19 154:14 162:13 179:17 196:2 211:19 235:21 246:4 251:12 253:2 255:16,21 257:13 264:4 267:3 sound 106:16 sounds 50:3 68:21 103:16 106:14 source 27:10 28:5

75:13 162:11 227:10,14 sources 32:13

72:12 128:1 188:21 212:18,21 247:2,4 sourcing72:3 Southern 6:21 SP 176:13 space 195:18 196:16 spacing41:5 speak 9:18,19 10:1

48:2 80:9 123:4 207:18 209:4 211:13 266:10,19 speaker 267:4 speaking 54:3

81:10 98:13 110:7 125:1 188:9 229:2 special 77:11 specific 16:14 17:20 34:21 39:1

### 202-234-4433 Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Page 298 71:22 108:15,18 109:3 151:22 171:3 174:2 183:13 202:4 203:7 207:18 specifically 20:15

20:21 29:9 55:12 69:3 70:2 72:4 77:12 93:10 108:22 172:12 specification 44:16 specifications

25:19 26:1,3,12 26:16 41:2,7 specifics 106:10 specified 79:19

93:7 specifies 27:6 41:3 specify40:14 specifying 26:21 specs 45:4 spectral 28:10

29:21 37:14 spectrum 123:22 158:21 198:12,13 202:2,5,8,13,14 202:19,22 spectrums 195:11 speculate 73:14 Speculation 98:5 speculative 73:4 speeches 74:20 spend 212:3 262:18 spending 216:13 spent 169:3 spoke 75:1 218:14 spot265:3 spotlights 189:8 spread 32:18,21,22 square 26:22 240:5 squeezers 209:2 st 13:16 17:4 stability 27:5 28:2 stabilization 27:3,7

27:22 28:1 49:15 stacks 8:19 staff69:8 stage 71:1,16,17 92:2 101:4,18 179:22 180:14 189:17,19 191:16 211:9 248:2 249:15 257:1 260:6 stages 5:5 19:18

23:9 33:20 90:2 stakeholder 13:13 stakeholders 13:20

69:11 94:6 146:2 157:17 stand 73:21 standard’s 39:18 standard 5:8 18:5

22:22 24:20,22 31:18 37:3 38:10 39:12,14,22 40:19 43:11 46:4 49:5 71:12,21 80:19,21 80:21 83:2 94:11 97:3 101:8 102:17 109:19 111:13 118:9 120:3,5,10 120:18 121:6 126:9 130:7 132:20 134:16 142:16 145:21 148:8 149:12 152:5,7 154:5,11 154:13 157:14 158:21 161:1 168:3 178:17 180:13 182:5,15 186:21 187:17 188:8 196:3,4 198:13 202:13 204:7 217:19 224:13,15 232:10 239:5 252:13,15 standards 1:23 3:9

4:5 7:3 8:6,12,16 16:2,5 17:20 18:21 19:7 20:16 23:4 24:9,11 25:7 26:14 27:15 28:18 33:7,21 41:19 43:5,19 61:7 68:12 81:14 85:16 87:16 88:2,9,12 88:15,16 89:3,7 89:11,12,20 90:5 90:10,13,15,17,21 90:22 91:4,13,16 91:21 92:14 93:3 93:6,9 94:12,15 95:13 97:8 100:20 105:5,7,9,13,15 116:9 118:12 127:20 128:9 143:12,13,19 148:2 155:10,12 158:7 159:4,6 164:7,7 165:17 166:4,5,11,12,21 167:9 192:6 195:17 223:21 227:6 228:17 232:22 234:13,16 237:9 241:12 248:12 249:13 252:2 253:16,16 262:6,7 Standing 60:5 stands 77:22 Star 1:19 6:15

35:12 45:4,17 213:11,19 221:20 222:1 start4:12 5:12,14

7:20 11:22 12:7 15:15 17:15 33:7 37:6 61:11 68:10 68:16 72:9 86:13 88:5 100:4 102:4 137:15 161:7 248:3 268:9 started 50:1 113:4 113:8 115:6 146:11 200:9 211:11 242:13 starting 37:4 81:22 104:4 168:13 169:15 170:13 187:18 213:13 217:4 234:18 243:4 starts 37:4 state 111:22 112:6 112:7 113:17 181:18 208:12 250:20,21 252:19 253:10,18 stated49:15 74:7 112:13 197:17 statement47:10 103:13 113:12,13 statements 3:3,7 10:13 15:5 16:8 74:14 151:12 STATES 1:1 stating 99:17 statistic 54:15 statistical 53:2

54:11,16 55:11 56:17 197:1 statistically 51:19

54:3 56:6 statistician 52:6

55:1,22 statisticians 52:7

54:19,19 55:19 statistics 55:2

56:16 225:10 statute 71:9 statutory 70:12

76:12 stay 111:19 stayed 213:14 steady 213:14 Steel 87:1 step 100:17 136:1 140:2 202:12 Stephens 2:3 6:16

6:16 23:6 29:4,5,5 29:15,19 30:13,20 55:17,18,18 56:15 56:21 142:16 149:15 152:13,14 152:18 153:20 158:4 167:17 168:18 169:3,11 171:1,2,10,13,17 185:19 186:17 211:1,1 216:11,11 219:22 220:6 222:3 229:2 233:2 239:18,18 240:21 250:11 254:10,18 259:17,18 260:3,5 steps 3:15 9:7 16:6 140:20 202:17 203:1 step-by-step 139:22 Steve 2:2 6:12 13:4

13:5 36:5,6 42:12 42:14 46:19 59:7 59:9 80:6,7 93:17 93:19 109:22 110:2 128:22 129:1 134:9,12 154:2,3 159:17,19 160:8 166:16,18 175:11,13 177:11 194:21 199:5,21 203:16,17 213:1,3 227:9,15 230:10 231:2,3 235:16 238:14,15 241:4,5 253:22 254:2 256:6 257:16,18 258:22 260:12 264:8,10 265:3 267:12 Steven 164:2

183:15 194:22 235:17 Stevens 167:16 Steve's 44:21

239:21 262:5 stick 232:21 sticking 97:17 stock 234:11,14

235:3 237:10 stop 59:4 stopped 167:1

### 202-234-4433 Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Page 299 191:20 store 82:2 159:21 186:2 stores 231:16 straight211:19 strains 98:9 straits 245:19 Strangely 171:5 strategy 21:16

207:20 streamline 94:8 195:4 street 170:8,11,12 172:11 220:12 stretch 191:17 strict 102:21 stringent 105:7 strong 69:17 strongly 52:12 56:1 structure 71:9 123:2,7 124:7 studies 220:20

238:18 239:9 247:8 study 215:13

216:14 218:20,22 219:18 220:16 stuff 11:21 67:19 138:11 158:6 subgroup 257:2 subgroups 248:14

257:4 subject 69:15 74:19

252:14 submit 14:1 46:11

58:6,22 60:15 117:16 submitted 61:7,11

67:2 191:5 submitting 66:22 147:21 263:14 Subpart25:4 31:16 subsequent 18:15

21:20 262:1 subsequently 93:5 127:21 substantial 61:16 216:5 219:11 substitutes 173:21 substitution 235:22

236:22 246:11 250:16,17 254:4 sufficient77:17

97:7,13 128:1 sufficiently 124:16 193:13 197:11 263:21 suggest47:9 77:21

79:12,17 146:19 suggested 23:19 165:2 suggesting 63:17

65:12 149:20 180:11 234:2 suggestion 163:8 163:19 165:12,18 232:17 suggestions 69:20

74:6 79:3 113:8 232:19,21 suggests 38:18 suitable 37:20 sulfur 258:12 summarize78:4 summary 8:9 12:8 16:8 40:17 68:14 198:4 221:12 summer 81:3 83:11

258:6 super 130:12 supplemental

21:15 36:15 supplied 64:15

209:11 supply 54:9 172:19

208:20 support 6:15 21:21

78:13 86:10 99:15 100:1 107:7 109:18 111:17 120:8 121:20 126:4 supported 52:11 supportive 53:13 107:2 supports 119:21 suppose 152:22 supposed4:15 101:17 180:5 258:2,5 suppress 241:10,15 sure 34:5 43:2

45:22 48:22 54:20 104:1 107:19 110:21 134:22 139:5 142:11 144:2 160:3 165:3 168:7 176:19 193:12,14 201:1 223:5 238:5 239:20 240:1,12 253:14 surface 97:9 surprised47:3 surprising 258:8 surrounding 12:8

72:4 survey 188:17,18

217:5 239:13 surveys 238:18 Susan 1:16 6:6

23:17,18 30:8 32:6,7 34:1 36:5 44:6 47:14 62:18 107:11 115:14 119:19 122:5 123:11 125:8 130:4 133:16 135:14 141:20 145:4 149:5 152:16 161:14 164:12 167:6,12 168:14 169:13 172:9 181:7 182:18 184:7 192:18 193:15 194:20 200:5 204:10 209:9 215:10 218:5 221:6,8 227:3 229:20 230:13 249:18 255:7 Susan's 151:6,6

188:16 191:12 suspect 153:12 suspicious 56:1 sustainability 134:7 SW 1:12 sweeping76:18 switch 236:4 Sylvania 1:16 6:7

252:16 sync 144:11 system 23:4 118:20 118:20 140:10 155:15,20,22 156:19 173:22 217:16 220:11 222:7 229:5 240:8 245:14 systems 6:3 22:10

23:3,14 114:16 117:11 121:7 156:13 218:13 222:10 235:10 S-E-S-S-I-O-N

138:21 T table 84:4 90:3 119:7 124:5 136:21 141:5,12 158:3 159:15 175:10 177:6,8,8 178:15 183:10 Tables 177:10 tailor 234:2 take 8:1 42:20,21

59:1 67:7,16 89:20 100:21 102:12 146:12 153:1 189:7,8 223:2,2 229:18 242:20 246:19 247:18 258:20 267:9 taken 27:5 45:15 115:5 223:13 takes 86:13 208:18 talk 25:9 32:21

48:5 106:3 188:3 208:4 236:2 talked 23:3 109:12 127:3 216:1 talking 50:2,3 57:1

83:17 98:18 100:20 101:7 102:4 135:18 159:21 168:5 169:20 196:4 200:16,18 206:21 211:11 219:21 229:10 252:16 254:19 262:6 talks 21:10 tarry 68:3 task 115:5 tax 205:11 225:1 TCP 180:10 team 115:7,8 190:22 tech 80:1,22 84:13

84:15,22 85:21,22 174:6 175:8,17 176:8,17 177:1,14 177:17,22 178:2,6 179:9,19 180:3,15 181:2 183:9,11 191:17 technical 20:12

31:20 58:2 85:15 99:15 100:1 115:4 195:18 196:15 268:12 technological 116:19 210:6 technologically

91:22 101:5 140:14 174:5 180:7 technologies 84:17 101:12,15,18 113:21 131:16,20 131:21 136:15,20

### 202-234-4433 Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Page 300 136:22 173:10 176:20 179:13 203:20 204:4 206:20 235:6 243:15 technology 3:10

8:17 76:4 90:20 101:9 110:6 112:15 113:21 116:10,13,14,18 116:20 117:7,14 118:3 126:14,16 126:17 127:1,2,10 127:12,16 136:12 136:13 137:6,9 140:12 168:21 180:21 218:21 240:3 250:19 254:7 telephone 11:16,16 tell 170:13 243:7

251:9 telling 114:22 temperature 27:6

41:4,12 42:5 47:16 90:14 118:22 122:2 141:6 182:22 193:18,20,20 194:14 temperatures 42:3

47:17,18 122:1,10 182:12 ten 199:11 223:2,9 tend 100:2 tentatively 27:11

27:16 28:14,19 tenth 52:13 terbium 72:5 171:13 172:4 term 32:17 43:20

65:15 111:3 158:7 172:16 207:22 termed 211:15 terms 44:4 67:9

70:8 72:2 73:5 76:7 77:19 85:19 86:10 102:16 106:10 108:12,14 108:22 154:5,6,7 154:18 155:8,9,13 155:14,15 158:11 159:20 167:2 176:6 180:22 183:22 184:4 185:20 196:10 199:14 208:1 214:22 227:22 228:11,18 231:15 231:17 232:2 238:6,16 254:21 257:19 258:14 261:16 test 1:5 3:5 4:6 7:22

8:4 12:9,12,15 15:6,19 16:3,15 16:21 17:15,22 18:4,12,16,19 19:2,6,8,13,15 20:4,6,14,17,20 20:22 21:2,7,12 21:13,17,21 22:17 22:21 23:1 24:21 25:1,9 31:12,14 32:1,4,11 33:8,14 33:17,19 34:22 35:4 36:16 37:5 39:5,11 40:18 41:3 42:19 43:16 43:17 44:14 46:12 48:13,14,16,19,21 49:8 50:4 52:16 54:1,14 55:21 59:22 63:4 67:4 76:21 87:8 109:2 122:2,3,4,10,11 122:16 132:12,17 132:18 157:8 202:18 264:15,18 tested 29:10 56:7 122:7 186:5,21 202:6 testing 26:8,10

27:18 28:21 29:8 30:10 33:16 35:19 37:21 38:2 39:6 39:16,20 40:19 41:9,10,17,20 42:9,18 43:1 44:10,11 45:6,7 46:10,15 47:11 51:2,13 56:9 57:12,17 58:5,7 58:12 59:3 60:2 62:6,15 63:8,12 63:17 64:2,3 65:2 66:3,8 75:2,8,13 75:19 76:6 153:3 153:16 161:18 190:19 191:1 218:12 tests 26:20 42:10 th4:6 13:18 16:21 17:1,2 19:19 54:1 67:3 80:14 124:18 thank 5:11 6:5 13:3 14:5 31:2 35:9 47:19 51:7 55:16 60:17 65:16 67:9 69:7 80:3,4,8 86:4 86:6,20 94:17 100:3 104:15 105:3 111:7,9 114:6 116:5 117:22 120:11,12 126:12 130:3 139:12 145:3 152:15 158:13 163:11 164:21 169:11 173:2 177:3,4 178:21 179:3 193:11 197:6 200:4 209:17 215:9 227:17 228:20,21 237:2 238:12 242:7,17 250:8 255:6 263:7 264:7 264:20 265:12 thanks 36:5 38:21

46:18 65:4 115:13 118:2 134:19 135:4 153:22 169:12,13 170:21 173:4 184:11 194:19 231:1 237:3 265:2,20,21 266:2 268:15 theoretical 185:14 187:13 192:1 247:7 theory 29:15 168:2 therefrom 79:16 they'd 34:19 thickness 127:15 thing 5:3 14:18

34:2 44:2,7 63:22 84:12 103:16 115:15 177:21 181:3,20 187:19 193:2,2 208:22 217:3,14 228:13 230:16 233:14 254:21 256:16 things 5:4,4 15:1

45:10 65:10 81:12 110:12,16 146:12 169:14 195:13 199:17 207:19 208:2 211:2 231:22 238:16 245:18 265:16 267:20 268:12 think7:16 10:11 17:11 21:11,18 23:5 38:5 45:2,3 46:20 49:14 56:4 57:19,20 58:20 59:2,21 66:14 67:6,21 79:2 80:10 83:6,7 84:14,20 85:2,13 85:16,17,22,22 86:15,16 87:2,7 87:10 94:7 95:14 95:20 100:19 101:4,10,18 102:9 104:19 105:4 106:12 107:1 110:4,21 111:11 116:1 120:6,21 126:3,5 127:4 138:4 139:2 142:12,16 144:3 144:11,12,13,19 145:9 150:13 157:6,8,10 160:15 162:15,17 163:12 165:22 166:8 167:17,19,20,22 168:4,13 177:1 180:11,19 188:20 189:17,19 191:10 191:19 193:2 197:13 201:9 202:2,5 204:3 206:3,17,21 211:10,13,17,20 213:6,6,7 214:13 219:5 220:12,15 222:21 223:11 227:19 228:3,5,12 228:12 229:17,22 230:11,19 231:6 231:12 232:14,20 233:2 236:17 239:14 240:8,11 240:12,16,22 241:9,20 243:18 252:10,21 253:19 255:13,13 259:6 262:9,19 263:20 265:17 266:18 267:7 thinking44:3,4

81:13,18 84:8 94:22 102:15 154:7 159:21 196:12 246:4 thinks 151:13 153:6 third 28:5 73:1

211:22 Thirty-four 180:10 thought43:16 81:4

### 202-234-4433 Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Page 301 158:15 171:8 189:22 196:22 248:7 thousand 76:17 three42:19,20

68:18 79:17 86:13 89:20 92:12 102:13 125:18 134:14 153:2 171:11 172:6 174:1 176:5 191:7 196:4 202:12,17 202:22 213:21 214:19,21 215:6 249:3,11 252:18 254:12 three-foot77:9 106:19 thresholds 26:22

27:9 28:8 throughs 106:18 throw 180:9 throwing 113:8 tied 103:6 157:9 Tier70:13,16,17

71:3,5,10,11,13 71:20 Tim 6:10 37:11

38:22 94:18,19 165:20,21,22 255:10,11 262:3,4 time 9:18,19 10:10 10:21 12:14 20:19 31:17 33:15,16,19 37:6 40:6 46:3 52:2,21 70:11,11 76:6 86:4 94:4,16 99:13,21 102:20 112:14 114:4,9 132:21 137:4 149:12 157:6,17 157:20 169:18 180:3 181:3 188:5 188:6,9 201:9 202:3 203:15 207:22 208:18 225:4 232:19 239:2 247:20 249:22 253:6 262:2 263:5 timeline 259:11 times 81:17 87:3

240:9 timetable 259:4 timing 13:12 36:7

36:19 43:4 69:17 70:8 72:2 73:1 85:15 86:10 94:10 110:20 111:15 261:15 TIMOTHY 1:17 Tina 1:16 3:3,17

4:13 7:19 14:7 22:2,6 36:21 43:7 65:5 68:10 142:4 169:16,17 171:2 206:16 208:12 220:8 221:9 232:5 245:21,22 251:6 255:13 265:9 266:12,13 tiny 169:19 today4:7 9:3,12,14

29:10 30:11 70:3 76:1 82:16 104:5 106:3 187:14 243:9 267:17 268:16 today's 15:16,18

69:15 87:17 tolerance 37:17,19

37:20 38:7,14 56:5 149:8 tolerances 28:3,4,6 151:20 top 62:14 151:9 181:19 199:13 topic 33:1 53:3

55:13 57:9 247:21 topics 114:18 total 62:13 224:12

224:19 225:13 237:19 totally 123:17 134:8 216:6 231:22 touch49:3 207:3

257:14 touched 197:13

247:3 tougher 253:16 TPC 49:3 track 14:18 105:21 170:21 trade 39:22 56:12

98:12 210:17 tradition 5:12 traditional 42:19

59:13,17 246:13 trails 129:4 transcript9:20 transition 68:12 trapped 194:2 travels 268:16 trends 117:17

205:12 225:19,21 trial 80:19,21,21

83:2 tried 152:4 161:16 186:15 219:3 tries 148:20 triphosphor72:7 trouble 104:4,7

229:8,15 true 64:15 truly 80:1 try4:22 11:11 14:4

67:11,12,12 82:3 94:3,15 99:2 131:7 207:21 218:9 265:15 trying 22:17,18,19

30:16 102:16,21 111:7,11 146:10 148:22 151:10 153:9 228:1 268:9 TSD 89:17 102:10 TSL5 190:1 tubular 97:20 TUESDAY 1:9 tungsten41:22 42:1 136:15 246:13 turn 10:5,17 101:14 turning 5:21 turnout4:19 twice 134:18 two 5:2,3,4 31:4

51:14 57:13 61:20 70:15 79:12 86:15 87:3,10 88:13 90:9 92:12 96:13 97:4 120:9 125:19 125:22,22 141:22 144:20 180:3,15 180:17 181:11 183:20 191:19 195:10 197:18 198:5 213:21 224:1 237:22 249:9,15 251:10 254:12 two-foot77:9 106:19,22 145:18 146:17 type 11:10 68:19

90:14 96:22 108:8 110:4 118:7 216:16 217:5 229:19 235:8 246:13 250:18 255:3 267:16 types 19:8,10 26:16

29:10 77:8 89:13 91:13,17,19,20 92:9,11 105:6,8 109:1 123:1,8 175:7 183:13 typical 215:21 typically 86:13 121:1 141:2 162:19 206:11 213:18 230:6 typo 142:13 T12 81:19,20,21

82:2 119:14 120:2 122:6 143:18,20 155:20 163:18 164:3,8,14 165:2 165:14 166:10 167:7 168:4 230:2 T12s 166:20,20,22

167:4,21 T5 27:7 119:12,18

120:2,3,3,5,8,9,9 120:10,18 121:7 122:8 182:4,8 T5HO 120:6 T5s 121:21 169:1 T8 25:20 82:3

90:18 119:14 120:2 122:6 129:5 130:7 131:1 147:8 151:2 155:21 230:2 T8s 163:16,19

164:11 167:20 169:1 U U 146:17 UL 192:3 Ultimately 56:19 unable 251:14 unbiased 52:14,17 uncertainty 72:3 unclear 64:6,6 underpinnings

247:7 understand4:20

5:6 30:17,22 42:15 60:3 85:5,6 100:16 102:19 110:18 111:7 116:2 149:1 152:21 153:18 164:10 168:10 169:5 172:20 177:12 195:3 207:13 229:4 261:2,6,9 understanding

43:10 47:5 106:2 148:11 162:8

### 202-234-4433 Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Page 302 180:4 193:3 194:7 194:9,16 206:5 207:19 undertake 115:6 undertaking 78:4 undertakings 78:5 Underwriters 97:8 under-appreciated

70:19 unfair75:5 216:7 unfortunately

202:10 235:20 unhappy 82:9 unique 118:17 unit52:21 108:15 172:13 237:10,20 UNITED 1:1 units 37:17,19,20 unmute 268:6 unnecessary 20:10 unprecedented 177:2 unsuitable 120:20 update 17:21 20:15

24:12,18 25:12 26:17 34:18 173:4 updated 25:6 27:8

27:21 28:7 updates 24:8 25:11

26:19 27:19 updating 24:12

26:6 50:5 upgrades 245:2 upwards 191:3 usable79:6 175:22 usage 214:3,9,9

218:2 238:9 USC 71:2 use 3:13 4:16,16

9:1 26:4 37:21 38:19 40:6 41:9 42:8,18 43:21 46:2 53:5,9 65:14 77:7 88:4 90:19 91:5 101:17 111:2 119:16 121:2,4 126:19,20 130:6,9 150:19,21 152:1 154:9,13 155:14 155:17 156:19 157:18,21 166:3 168:21 173:17 174:9,17 180:2 190:21 193:19,22 194:14 204:19,22 209:15 212:9,9,18 213:9 216:1 217:11 222:14 225:1,9,17 226:1 226:5 227:22 233:10 234:20,21 237:14 242:14 268:4 useful 71:13 110:19

224:9 265:22 user 129:5,22

204:20 216:7 users 124:18 130:8

245:2 uses 234:14 usually 121:16 176:5 utilities 2:2 6:20

21:4 121:20 130:6 162:5 218:11 228:7 257:6 utility 102:1 117:4 118:11,14,18 119:4 124:18 130:14 133:18 134:8 174:10 182:17,20 189:3 226:1 227:11 236:5 245:5 257:4 utilizes 127:16 UV 127:13 U-shape 146:6 U-shaped 144:20 145:18 198:6 U.S 98:20 129:3

225:10 228:10 V V 28:11 29:20 valid 56:11 191:15 validate 65:19 valleys 211:20 value 37:13 38:19 148:2 150:11 172:3 178:18 186:4 205:7 224:8 226:6 234:16 237:17,19 248:22 values 23:20 147:5 150:15 151:15 153:1 154:21 178:12,14,15,20 183:13 185:21 186:9,10,12,18 187:2,21 205:2 235:13 variation 149:9 varies 91:2 120:2 various 78:15 100:8 109:1 157:7 191:6 209:14 212:18 234:16 240:9 257:3,15 vary 90:13 vendors 204:5 verbal 183:5 198:21 203:9 246:22 247:13 256:7,10 verify43:20 142:20 version 24:14

25:14,18 26:7,18 26:18 27:8,20,21 28:7 34:5,21 35:21 130:13 versions 24:19 29:1

49:12 versus 55:13 65:1 120:3 178:2 198:12,14,15 232:3,4,13 255:2 264:12 viable 161:19 vibration41:4

92:21 view 83:18 241:16 virtually 219:13 virtue 255:18 visible 67:20 volatile 249:21 volt 124:17,21 125:6,14 133:18 133:20,22 134:2 134:13 135:18 187:16 199:9,10 voltage 26:22 27:9

28:4,6,8 39:20 40:20 41:2 42:4 47:7 92:17 124:1 124:19 125:11 126:5,8 132:5,8 132:15 134:21 135:6,10,17,18 136:2,3,5 158:22 195:10,10 voltages 47:6,8 133:9 volts 92:18 125:11 126:6 132:10 133:6 158:22 199:22 volume 75:9 77:10

86:18 96:8 106:16 141:3 164:19 181:20W wait73:18 227:8 waiting 248:9 walk 67:20 106:18 138:8 186:1 Wall 170:8,10,11 172:11 want 11:2 13:13

30:9 38:19 48:1,5 52:7 54:21,22 58:21 68:16 69:7 85:11 98:20 100:19 115:18 131:10 144:1 163:1 170:14 172:10 179:4 185:19 192:22 200:12 223:1 229:4 232:17 236:21 255:8 265:11 266:7 wanted 19:17 21:4

23:12 36:1 45:22 68:13 120:13 122:21 123:6 132:4,6 133:21 170:20 174:16 177:8 182:3 203:18 210:1 264:1 wants 36:9 68:15 113:18 warranted 88:16 146:3 Washington 1:12

255:4 wasn't 33:15 165:3 190:1 208:14 220:16 230:13 263:20 waste 134:7 watch 11:11 223:10 watt25:19,20,20

32:10 84:1,2,5,7 90:13 108:1,9 109:16,19 147:6 148:4,7,14,16 159:10,11,12,12 159:12 160:1,20 160:22 161:2,3,4 174:13,15 176:15 178:12,14 181:17 183:18 184:2,3,5 185:4,4,9,10,22 190:12,20 191:4,4 wattage 25:20 26:2

28:7 29:14 91:2 92:19 130:12,13 131:2 134:3 150:4 150:22 154:19 159:8,9 160:4 174:9 182:7,10,16 182:17,19,21 183:1,19,22

### 202-234-4433 Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Page 303 184:13 185:8 186:5 193:22 194:8 225:15 wattages 29:17

90:16 159:14 160:16,17,19 174:3 watts 92:19 150:6 150:17,20 153:1 184:10,10,12 186:3 222:7 240:4 way 30:15,21 46:13

53:10,16 80:13 85:8 94:6,8 99:16 101:9 105:20 106:5 123:15 138:8 172:7,14 175:20 188:1 196:3,14 231:19 232:15 251:1,19 253:20 259:20 ways 268:9 wear223:6 web 11:15 15:2

67:10 webinar 10:16,19 10:21 11:2,6 49:11 265:21 266:9,14,17 webinars 266:6,15 website 36:3 219:4

259:10 260:17,19 261:11 week 114:18,22,22 115:5 128:19 169:4,4 208:15 weeks 104:3 weigh 167:18 189:17 weighted 205:10 welcome 3:2 4:4,18

68:10 124:8 139:2 249:16 welcomes 16:10 119:17 128:3 198:17 205:15 226:16 welcoming4:13 11:7 went62:4 68:6,7

80:22 83:21,22 84:1 130:21 138:16,17 171:6 184:1 188:6 236:14 weren't256:6 we'll4:21,22 7:22

8:5,18,19 9:1,10 9:12 11:11,20 12:22 14:4 31:8 31:10 47:12 64:22 67:12,16 68:5 102:3 114:18 128:19 133:13 136:11 138:2,15 142:20,21 143:8 167:17 173:6 206:17 212:8 216:16,19,22 217:2,6 219:22 221:13 223:8 232:21 240:10 248:3 257:8 259:14 266:19 267:8 we're4:12 7:20 9:2 10:20 17:21 18:1 24:3 32:20 37:3 40:16 50:5 51:22 53:15,18 54:20 55:19 60:22 63:22 67:7 68:11 72:1 79:1 87:16 95:7 98:17 100:20 103:2 104:6 105:1 111:12 112:4 114:20 136:10 138:13,14 139:3 144:11,12 148:11 148:22 150:1 160:11 161:11,17 168:5 169:15,15 170:13 172:4 179:22 185:21 188:3 192:16 194:17 196:18 203:10 210:5 211:10,16,21 216:21 221:3,12 222:15 223:15,17 232:12 240:4 243:2,3,4,9,11,13 243:18 244:21 245:10,14,16 247:21 249:2 251:13 252:15 256:11,19 257:14 263:11 265:5 266:18 268:9 we've 34:2 69:9 100:4 107:15 109:11 127:3 131:7 138:12 155:8 197:13 200:8 217:14 218:20 219:21 222:19 240:22 245:13 249:22 264:3 267:10 268:8 whammy 252:22 white 119:2 128:17 164:15 wide 215:3 widely 39:18 113:22 wiggle 176:15 wild 228:4 window 33:18 winner 131:22 wisdom71:10 wish 10:1 55:5 142:4 151:8 175:22 194:12 242:21 265:6 wishes 9:10 70:5 withdrawn48:9,11

49:8 wonder 63:3

235:19 wondering94:20 104:17 239:7,9 word 111:12 work 10:8 55:12,20

55:22 82:4 87:17 111:16 115:16 129:2 146:21 180:7 196:6 197:4 241:1 245:18 265:16,18 worked 238:22

268:13 working 5:10 33:4

49:1 64:12 69:10 105:1 113:4,5 114:11 116:21 207:3 218:20 world 160:11 185:17 worried 195:5 199:17 259:2 worst49:6 222:4 worth 57:16 99:20

208:22 217:1 worthwhile 38:11 wouldn't30:14

37:8 55:20 95:18 142:18 149:11 261:4 write 113:19 writes 87:2 writing 60:15

250:1 written 9:16 30:12

54:9 74:11 wrong45:3 160:2 162:7 242:16 wrote 50:15 X XP 130:11 XPS 130:11 Y yards 138:8 yeah 170:10,11 181:1 256:17 year42:21,22

46:10,14 48:11 58:4,13 61:11 62:15 70:17 109:21 130:1 131:4,4 163:7 164:9 165:17 188:17,18 206:11 210:21 212:15 216:20,21 217:1,2 227:21 243:6 years 19:3 20:5

48:10 69:8 70:15 74:1 81:21 82:8 82:20 86:13,16 89:21 95:19 98:6 100:22 101:1 102:12,13 103:15 130:2 168:11,20 176:4 180:3,16,17 190:16 191:19 206:15 208:21 211:12 228:9 234:18 262:9 268:7 year's 217:1 yesterday 11:17 139:7 Ytterbium 172:2,3 yttrium 72:5 171:12,14,18,19 172:5 Y-T-T-R-I-U-M 172:5 Z zero 210:10 233:10 $ $1 210:11 $1,400 62:9 $1,500 62:11 $10 246:16 $10,000 62:13 $132,800 62:14 $135 170:4 $135-ish 171:6 $2 210:11 $20,000 62:12 $28,000 62:9

### 202-234-4433 Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Page 304 $40,000 62:10 $60,000 62:16 $90 170:4 $92 171:6 0 0.4 233:7 240:4 0.5 233:71 1 70:16,17 71:5,11

71:20 1E-245 1:12 1,00043:11,12,18

44:5 57:17 59:15 1,027 56:3 1,042 56:4 1.1 198:10 10 25:4 31:15 32:16

48:10 67:15 81:20 82:7,20 173:15 236:10 10:00 67:15 10:09 68:7 10:15 8:1 10:25 67:17 68:4,8 100 138:8 1000 1:12 11 54:2 92:8 106:12 11:00 8:5,10 11:30 138:1 11:33 138:17 111 262:5 115 92:17 136:1 1243:6 119:6

135:18 152:9 193:13 12-month 51:16

60:8 12:15 8:18 12:30 138:15 12:40 138:18,22 120 132:8,10,12,17

133:20 134:2,13 198:15 199:9,10 125 125:1,11,14

126:6 158:22 13 81:17 193:13 236:11 130 92:18 124:17

124:21 125:6 132:18 133:6,18 133:22 134:2,12 136:1 187:16 198:15 199:22 139 3:11 14 16:22 17:3 19:20

73:11 80:15 124:19 14th 167:9 140 3:13 15 3:5 81:20 82:7

198:13,16 199:13 199:19 213:15 15-minute 67:16 15.5 198:15 200:22 1500 162:20 16 29:7 18.5 62:11 1975 18:6 1992 79:19 88:10 1993 49:13 1994 18:14 1997 18:15 2 2 38:14,19 70:13

71:3,10,13 258:1 2.25 88:20 92:18 2.4 215:21 2.5 159:1 2.7 134:17 2.75 88:20 2:00 223:9 2:49 268:18 20 11:1,6 40:14

51:13,18,18 52:12 53:13 54:2 81:21 82:7,20 87:5,13 188:7 213:12 218:16 236:15 2000 162:20 2001 48:1 2003 24:14 25:13

215:19 2005 95:14 2006 213:13 236:10 2007 19:1,22 39:6

59:11,14 88:17 92:22 93:7 213:13 2008 129:17 211:14 2009 19:5,7 24:19

26:18,18 29:1 34:4 35:21 80:15 81:2 84:13 89:6,9 90:12 93:4 108:2 119:8,10 120:21 124:2,15 126:21 127:17 129:17 133:22 136:19 141:9 143:12 147:7,9 159:5,7 166:19 174:7,11 174:21 175:4,8 182:6,9 183:9,12 188:5,10 189:22 198:2 199:1 200:11 204:22 227:20 234:20 2010 24:14 25:14

93:12,13 227:21 2011 1:9 4:7 16:22 17:2,3,5 19:20 67:4 101:7 165:3 215:13,17 242:6 2012 19:21 20:2

35:3 36:18 39:9 41:19 46:3 73:11 79:9,10 81:22 89:18 90:11,22 99:15 102:10 129:7 143:14,19 149:4 159:16 160:18 161:2 166:12 167:1 210:8 217:4 227:22 260:16 2013 89:19 2014 39:9 43:6

89:19 2017 89:22 100:21 102:17 103:14 234:18 2018 100:22 102:17 2046 234:18 242:11 205 184:10 21 51:20 52:1 53:14

54:3 242:20 246:20 214 3:15 22 242:20 243:17

246:20 2200 216:15 23/24 247:2 24/7 222:7 25 25:19 112:3 122:7,12 129:8 247:17 26 247:18 267 3:16 27 190:20 219:10

221:6 261:22 28 17:2 25:19 67:4 174:13 256:19 28th 264:6 29 261:22 2900 148:16 3 3 37:19,20 38:15 30 13:19 25:20 82:8 183:18 206:11,15 220:15 234:18 261:22 3000 148:13 150:5 31 13:17 17:5 262:1 31st263:16 32 151:3 174:15

262:1 32.5 150:6 151:2 33 99:12 3400 180:12 35 112:5 122:11 37 191:3 38 160:1 184:4 191:4 38s 159:20 4 4 1:9 3:3 4:7 71:2 80:21 83:2 4,00042:17 43:22 4,500 98:16 4.1.2.1 26:5 4.2 196:8 4:30 9:12 4044:10 45:5 92:19 159:11 183:18 184:5,10,12 211:12 4000 162:18 163:1 4100 141:10 430 25:4 31:15 45 17:4 49:14,19 144:21 4500 141:7 198:9 46 71:2 47 82:14 125:17 4947:22 5 5 37:17 38:15 80:22 5.9 190:5,8 196:12 196:13 199:8,18 5:00 9:12 50 32:15 40:6 52:2

52:22 53:8 159:10 214:2 500 14:15 51.7 184:2,9 185:1 186:3 52 185:22 55 159:12 184:1 57 183:17 6 6 198:10 6,00042:17 6.4 187:11 196:13

199:8,18 6.5 84:4 145:10

177:10 198:7 6.6 84:4 145:10

177:10 6.8 196:8 199:12 6.9 190:1 60 144:10 184:3,9

185:2,10 214:2

### 202-234-4433 Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. Page 305 61 183:17 62.95(i)(3) 71:2 64 3:6 82:14 65 161:3 66 159:12 160:1,20

184:3 185:9 68 3:7 7 7.4 199:12 70 129:8 214:2 75 17:1 83:22 159:11 185:4 77 122:8 8 8 192:22 8.5 237:15 240:17 80 84:1 800 90:19 861 225:22 87 164:6 88 3:10 89 83:22 84:5 148:8

149:21 154:6,11 9 9 24:19 26:18 9:00 1:13 9:05 4:2 90 159:12 160:22 161:2,4 185:4 207:7 900 222:7 91.9 142:17 92 70:13 71:2 142:17 147:6 92.3 84:7,8 147:8 148:4 150:8 154:9 154:13 93 84:5,8 97 84:2,9 176:14 98 84:9 176:14NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com C E R T I F I C A T E

This is to certify that the foregoing transcript

In the matter of:

Before:

Date:

Place:

was duly recorded and accurately transcribed under my direction; further, that said transcript is a true and accurate record of the proceedings.

----------------------- Court Reporter 306

Test Procedures Proposed Rulemaking Fluorescent and Incandescent Lamps

US DOE

10-04-11

Washington, DC