Energy Conservation Standards Rulemaking Framework Document for

General Service Lamps

RIN: 1904

- AD09

U.S. Department of Energy Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy

Building Technologies Program

December 2 , 201 3i TABLE OF CONTENTS

1. INTRODUCTION

................................ ................................ ................................ ................... 1

1.1 Authority and Background

................................ ................................ ............................... 1

2. OVERVIEW OF RULEMAKI NG PROCESS

................................ ................................ ........ 3

2.1 Rulemaking Proc ess and Stakeholder Participation

................................ ......................... 3

2.2 Test Procedures

................................ ................................ ................................ ................ 4

2.3 Preliminary Analyses and Notice of Public Meeting

................................ ....................... 6

2.4 Notice of Proposed Rulemaking

................................ ................................ ...................... 7

2.5 Final Rule

................................ ................................ ................................ ......................... 8

2.6 Overview of Analyses for Rulemaking

................................ ................................ ............ 8

3. SCOPE OF COVERAGE

................................ ................................ ................................ ........ 9

3.1 General Service Incandescent Lamps

................................ ................................ ............ 10

3.2 Compact Fluorescent Lamps

................................ ................................ .......................... 11

3.3 General Service LED and OLED Lamps

................................ ................................ ....... 13

3.4 Additional Lamps

................................ ................................ ................................ ........... 14

4. MARKET AND TECHNOLOG Y ASSESSME NT

................................ .............................. 15

4.1 Market Assessment Overview

................................ ................................ ........................ 15

4.2 Product Classes

................................ ................................ ................................ .............. 16

4.3 Technology Assessment

................................ ................................ ................................ . 17

5. SCREENING ANALYSIS

................................ ................................ ................................ .... 20

6. ENGINEERING ANALYSIS

................................ ................................ ............................... 21

6.1 Overview

................................ ................................ ................................ ........................ 21

6.2 Representative Product Classes

................................ ................................ ...................... 21

6.3 Baseline Lamps

................................ ................................ ................................ .............. 22

6.4 Identify Higher

- Efficacy Lamp Replacements

................................ .............................. 23

6.5 Efficacy Levels

................................ ................................ ................................ ............... 24

6.6 Scaling to Product Classes Not Analyzed

................................ ................................ ...... 24

6.7 Proprietary Designs

................................ ................................ ................................ ........ 25

6.8 Outside Regulatory Changes Affecting the Engineering Analysis

................................ 25

7. ENERGY USE CHARACTER IZATION

................................ ................................ ............. 26

8. PRODUCT PRICE DETERM INATION

................................ ................................ .............. 26

9. LIFE

- CYCLE COST AND PAYBA CK PERIOD ANALYSIS

................................ ........... 27

10. SHIPMENTS ANALYSIS

................................ ................................ ................................ .... 29

10.1 Base Case Forecast and Acc ounting Methodology

................................ ........................ 29

10.2 Impacts of Standards on Shipments

................................ ................................ ............... 29

11. NATIONAL IMPACT ANAL YSIS

................................ ................................ ...................... 29

11.1 Calculation of Natio nal Energy Savings

................................ ................................ ........ 30

11.2 Net Present Value

................................ ................................ ................................ ........... 30

12. LIFE

- CYCLE COST SUBGROUP ANALYSIS

................................ ................................ .. 31

13. MANUFACTURER IMPACT ANALYSIS

................................ ................................ ......... 31

13.1 Sources of Infor mation

................................ ................................ ................................ ... 31

13.2 Industry Cash Flow Analysis

................................ ................................ ......................... 32

13.3 Manufacturer Subgroup Analysis

................................ ................................ ................... 32

14. UTILITY IMPACT ANALY SIS

................................ ................................ ........................... 33

15. EMPLOYMENT IMPACT AN A LYSIS

................................ ................................ ............... 33ii

16. EMISSIONS ANALYSIS

................................ ................................ ................................ ..... 34

17. MONETIZING CARBON DI OXIDE AND OTHER EMIS SIONS REDUCTIONS

.......... 36

18. REGULATORY IMPACT AN ALYSIS

................................ ................................ ............... 37

APPENDIX A

– LIST OF I TEMS FOR COMMENT

................................ ................................ . 38

LIST OF TABLES

Table 2.1.1 Preliminary Rulemaking Schedule for GSL Energy Conservation Standards

............ 4

Table 4.2.1. Product Classes under Consideration for GSLs

................................ ........................ 17 Table 4.3.1 GSL Technology Options

................................ ................................ .......................... 18

Table 6.3.1 Standar ds for Standard Spectrum General Service Incandescent Lamps

.................. 22 Table 6.3.2 Standards for Modified Spectrum General Service Incande scent Lamps

................. 22 Table 6.3.3 Standards for Medium Base Compact Fluorescent Lamps

................................ ........ 23

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 2.6.1 Flow Diagram of Analyses for the GSL Standards Rulemaking Process

.................. 9iii LIST OF A B BREVIATIONS

AEO Annual Energy Outlook ( A nnual energy forecast published by EIA )

CAIR Clean Air Interstate Rule

CBECS Commercial Buildings Energy Consumption Survey by EIA

CCT correlated color temperature

CFR Code of Federal Regulations

CFL compact fluorescent lamp

CO 2 carbon dioxide

CRI color rendering index

CSAPR Cross

- State Air Pollution Rule (replaces CAIR)

CSL candidate standard level (energy

- efficiency level)

D.C. District of Columbia

D.C. Circuit District of Columbia Circuit

DOE U.S. Department of Energy

DOJ U.S. Department of Justice

EGU electricity generating unit

EIA Energy Information Administration ( statistical and anal ytical agency within DOE)

EISA Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007

EL efficacy level

EPA ct 2005 Energy Policy Act of 2005

EPCA Energy Policy and Conservation Act of 1975

FFC full

- fuel

- cycle

FR Federal Register

GHG greenhouse gas

GREET Greenhouse Gases, Regulated Emissions, and Energy Use in Transportation

GRIM Government Regulatory Impact Model

GSFL general service fluorescent lamp

GSL general service lamp

GSIL general service incandescent lamp

HAP hazardous air pollutants Hg mercury ImSET Impact of Sector Energy Technologies

IRL incandescent reflector lamp

K degrees K elvin ( an absolute temperature scale equal to

– 273.15 o C )

LCC life

- cycle cost

LED light emitting diode

lm lumen

LMC U.S. L ighting Market Characterization

Max tech maximum technologically feasible CSL

MBCFL medium base compact fluorescent lamp

MECS Manufacturer Energy Consumption Survey ( performed for EIA by the Census

Bureau )

MIA Manufacturer Impact Analysis

NEMS National Energy Modeling System ( developed and used by EIA )

NEMS

- BT National Energy Modeling System

– Building Technologiesiv

NES national energy savings

NIA National Impact Analysis

NOPR notice of proposed rulemaking

NO X nitrogen oxides

NPV net present value

OIRA Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs

OLED organic light emitting diode

OMB U.S. Office of Management and Budget

PBP payback period

PM particulate matter

RECS Residential Energy Consumption Survey by EIA

RIA regulatory impact analysis

SCC Social Cost of Carbon

SO 2 sulfur dioxide

TIM thermal interface material

TSD technical support document

TSL trial standard level

U.S.C. United States Code

V volts

W watts1

RULEMAKING FRAMEWORK DOCUMENT FOR GENERAL SERVICE LAMPS

1. INTRODUCTION

The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) develops and promulgates test procedures and energy conservation standards for certain consumer appliances and commercial equipment. The process for developing standards involves analysis, public notice and comment, and consultation with interested parties. Interested parties , also referred to as stakeholders, include manufacturers,

consumers , energy conservation and environm ental advocates, State and Federal agencies, and any other groups or individuals with an interest in these standards and test procedures.

The purpose of this document is to describe the procedural and analytical approaches the DOE anticipates using to evaluate energy conservation standards for general service lamps (GS L s ). It is intended to inform interested parties a nd to encourage a nd faci litate their input during the rulemaking. This document is the starting point for developing standards and not a definitive statement with respect to any issue to b e determined in the rulemaking.

Sections 1 and 2 discuss the rulemaking process. Sections 3 through 18 outline the analyses DOE intends to conduct to fulfill the statutory requirements and g uidance for this standards rulemaking. Information regarding this rulemaking will be maintained on the DOE

website at: http://www1.eere.energy.gov/buildings/appliance_standards/rulemaking.aspx?ruleid=83

.

While DOE invites stakeholder comment on all aspec ts of the material presented in this document, specific issues on which DOE seeks comment are highlighted by comment boxes.

These comment boxes include questions on the approaches DOE is proposing for the analyses required for the rulemaking. The text in the boxes is assembled in Appendix A.

1.1 Authority and Background

Title III of Energy Policy and Conservation Act of 1975 ( EPCA) (42 U.S.C. 6291 et seq. ) sets forth a variety of provisions designed to improve energy efficiency. Part B of Title III ( 42

U.S.C. 6291

- 6309) established the “Energy Conservation Program for Consumer Products Other Than Automobiles,” which includes major household appliances. 1 Subsequent amendments expanded Title III of EPCA to include additional consumer products and certai n commercial and industrial equipment, including GSLs

— the products that are the focus of this document. In particular, amendments to EPCA in the Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007 (EISA)

directed DOE to conduct two rulemaking cycles to evaluate energy conservation standards for

GSLs

. (42 U.S.C. 6295(i)(6)(A)

- (B))

For the first rulemaking cycle

, EPCA, as amended by EISA

, directs DOE to initiate a rulemaking no later than January 1, 2014 to evaluate standards for GSLs and determine whether exempti ons for certain incandescent lamps should be maintained or discontinued . (42 U.S.C. 6295(i)(6) (A)(i) ) T he scope of the rulemaking i s not limited to incandescent lamp technologies.

1 Part B was re

- designated Part A on codification in the U.S. Code for editorial reasons.2

(42 U.S.C. 6295(i)(6)(A)(ii)) The EISA amendments to EPCA further require that if standards

are to be established for GSLs , a final rule must be published by January 1, 2017 with a compliance date at least 3 years after the date on which the final rule is published. (42 U.S.C. 6295(i)(6) (A)(iii) ) Additionally, the requirements d irect DOE to consider phased

- in compliance dates based on the impact of amending standards on manufacturers, retiring and repurposing existing equipment, stranded investments, labor contracts, workers, raw materials, and time

needed to revise sales and mar keting strategies. (42 U.S.C. 6295(i)(6)(A)(iv))

Further , for this first cycle of rulemaking, the EISA amendments provide that DOE must

consider a minimum standard of 45 lumens per watt (lm/W) . (42 U.S.C. 6295(i)(6)(A)(ii)) I f

DOE fails to meet the requirements of 42 U.S.C. 6295(i)(6)(A)(i )

- ( iv) or the final rule from the

first rulemaking cycle does not produce savings greater than or equal to the savings from a minimum efficacy standard of 45 lm/ W , sales of GSLs that do not meet the minimum 45 lm/ W

standard beginning on January 1, 2020 will be prohibited . (42 U.S.C. 6295(i)(6)(A)(v)) Additionally

, state preempt ion requirements are specified for California and Nevada. Namely

, beginning January 1, 2018

, no provision of law could preclude these states from adopting: (1) a final rule adopted in accordance with 42 U.S.C. 6295(i)(6)(A)(i )

- ( iv) ; (2) t he minimum efficacy

standard of the backstop requirement (45 lm/ W ) if no final rule was adopted ; or (3) f or the state of California, any California regulation s related to the covered products adopted pursuant to

State statue in effect as of the date of enactment of EISA. 42 U.S.C. 6295(i)(6)(A)(vi)

The EISA

- prescribed amendments direct DOE to initiate a second rulemaking cycle by January 1, 2020 to determine whether standards in effect for general service incandescent lamps (GSILs) should be amended with more stringent requirements and if the exemptions for certain incandescent lamps should be maintained or discontinued. (42 U.S.C. 6295(i)(6)( B )(i)) For this

s econd review of energy conservation standards, the scope is not limited to incandescent lamp technologies. (42 U.S.C. 6295(i)(6)(B)(ii)) The EISA amendments require that if standards are to be amended for GSILs, a final rule must be publ ished by January 1, 2022 with a compliance date at least 3 years after the date on which the final rule is published. (42 U.S.C. 6295(i)(6)(B)(iii))

These amendments also direct DOE to consider phased

- in effective dates for the second round of

review based on the impact of a mending standards on manufacturers, retiring and repurposing existing equipment, stranded investments, labor contracts, workers, raw materials, and time needed to revise sales and marketing strategies. (42 U.S.C. 6295(i)(6)(B)(iv))

Additionally, this rulemaking satisfies the requirements under 42 U.S.C 6295(m)(1) for DOE to review the existing standards for medium base compact fluorescent lamps (MBCFLs)

, as compact fluorescent lamps are included in the definition of GSL . T he Energy Policy Act of 2 005 ( EPAct 2005) amended EPCA by establishing energy conservation standards for MBCFLs

. Under 42 U.S.C 6295(m)(1), within 6 years after issuance of any final rule establishing or amending a standard, DOE is required to publish a notice determining whether to amend such standards. If DOE determines that amendment is warranted, DOE must also issue a notice of proposed rulemaking including new proposed energy conservation standards by that same date. (42 U.S.C. 6295(m)(l) )

.3

T his framework document and the associated public meeting represent the first step in the process to consider whether to amend energy conservation standards for GSLs as well as to
fulfill the EPCA requirement to review standards for MBCFLs

.

2. OVERVIEW OF RULEMAKING PROCESS

2.1 Rulemaking Process and Stakeholder Participation

When DOE evaluates any new or amended energy conservation standard for “covered products

, ” EPCA, as amended, specifies that any standard DOE prescribes for consumer products must be desi gned to achieve the maximum improvement in energy efficiency that is technologically feasible and economically justified. (42 U.S.C. 6295(o)(2)(A)) Moreover, the Secretary of Energy ( Secretary) may not establish a new or amended standard if such standard

w ould not result in a significant conservation of energy. (42 U.S.C. 6295(o)(3)(B)) In determining whether a standard is economically justified, DOE must consider, to the greatest extent practicable, the following seven factors:

(1 ) T he economic impact of the standard on the manufacturers and on the consumers of the products subject to such standard; (2 ) T he savings in operating costs throughout the estimated average life of the covered product in the type (or class) compared to any increase in the price o f, or in the initial charges for, or maintenance expenses of, the covered products which are likely to result from the imposition of the standard; (3 ) T he total projected amount of energy, or as applicable, water, savings likely to result directly from the imposition of the standard; (4 ) A ny lessening of the utility or the performance of the covered products likely to result from the imposition of the standard; (5 ) T he impact of any lessening of competition, as determined in writing by the Attorney

General , that is likely to result from the imposition of the standard; (6 ) T he need for national energy and water conservation; and (7 ) O ther factors the Secretary considers relevant.

(42 U.S.C. 6295(o)(2)(B)(i) (I)

- (VII) )

The process of developing efficiency s tandards involves analysis, public notice, and consultation with interested parties. Such interested parties generally include manufacturers, consumers, energy conservation and environmental advocates, State and Federal agencies, and any other groups or in dividuals with an interest in energy conservation standards and test procedures. DOE considers participation of interested parties to be a very important part of the rulemaking process. Accordingly, DOE actively encourages the participation and interaction of all interested parties during the comment period provided at each stage of the rulemaking. The broad array of interested parties who routinely provide comments promotes a balanced discussion of critical information required to conduct the standards rul emaking, beginn ing with public comment on the framework d ocument.4

In conducting the test procedure rulemakings and the energy (and water) conservation standards rulemakings, DOE involves interested parties through a variety of means. As discussed in further detail below, the standards rulemaking process typically involve s three public notices in addition to the notice of availability of the framework document. All of these notices are published in the Federal Register . Publication of the framework document, preliminary analysis

, and NOPR are typically accompanied by publi c meetings and comment periods to solicit comment from interested parties to enhance the rulemaking process.

• Preliminary Analysis and Notice of Public Meeting (section 2.3 ). The preliminary analysis is designed to publicly vet the models and tools that DOE will use in the rulemaking, and to facilitate public participation before the proposed rule stage. Candidate standard levels (CSLs), which are l evels that span the range of efficiencies from baseline products to the most efficient technology, are the basis for demonstrating the functionality of the models and tools.

• Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (section 2.4 ). The NOPR presents a discussion of comments received in response to the preliminary analysis; DOE’s analysis of the impacts of potential standards on consumers, manufacturers, and the n ation; DOE’s weighing of these impacts; and the proposed standard levels for public comment.

• Final Rule (section 2.5 ). The final rule presents a discussion of comments received in response to the NOPR ; the revised analysis of the impacts of standards ; DOE’s weighing of the impacts ; and the standard levels DOE is adopting. The final rule also

establishes the date for compliance with any standards

.

DOE has prepared the preliminary schedule below for the GSL rulemaking.

Table 2.1

. 1 Preliminary Rulemaking Schedule for GSL Energy Conservation Standards

Deliverable Publication Date

Framework Document December 2013 Preliminary Analysis November 2014

NOPR December 2015

Final Rule December 2016

Any final e nergy conservation standards for GSLs w ould require compliance at least three years after the final rule is published

, which is projected to be December 2019 ( see 42 U.S.C. 6295(6 )( A ) (iii) ).

2.2 Test Procedures

EPCA sets forth generally applicable criteria and procedures for DOE’s adoption and amendment of test procedures

. (42 U.S.C. 6 293 ) M a nufacturers of covered products must use these test procedures to certify to DOE that their product complies with EPCA energy conservation standards and to quantify the efficiency of their product

. DOE is considering developing and amending test procedures for products included in the definition of GSL. The

term GSL includes GSILs , compact fluorescent lamps (CFLs) , general service light

- emitting5

diode (LED) lamps, organic light

- emitting diode (OLED) lamps, and any other lamps that the Secretary determines are used to satisfy lighting applications traditionally served by general service incandescent lamps . 10 CFR 430.2 For a more detailed discussion of scope, see section 3

.

DOE’s test procedures for GSILs are set forth at 10 CFR part 430, subpart B, appendix R. These test procedures provide instructions for measuring GSIL performance largely by incorporating industry standards. These test procedures were updated in a final rule published in January 2012. 77 FR 4203 ( January 27, 2012 ). The rule updated citations and references to the industry standards currently referenced in DOE’s test procedures for GSILs and establish ed a new test procedure for determining the rated lifetime of GSILs.

I n the preliminary analysis of the general service fluorescent lamp (GSFL) and incandescent reflector lamp (IRL) energy conservation standards rulemaking 2 (hereafter “GSFL and IRL Standards Rulemaking”), DOE concluded that the term “compact fluorescent lamps”

includes both pin base and medium base CFLs (see section 3 for further discussion). DOE’s test procedures for MBCFLs are set forth at 10 CFR part 430, subpart B, appendix W

. These test procedures provide instructions for measuring MBCFL performance b y referencing version 2.0 of ENERGY STAR’s program requirements

. Currently there is no DOE test procedure for pin base CFLs. However, EPCA directs DOE to establish test procedures for covered products in advance of prescribing an energy conservation standa rd. ( 42 U.S.C. 6295(o)(3)(A ) ) Therefore, DOE plans to initiate a test procedure rulemaking to propose test procedures for pin base CFLs.

DOE is currently developing test procedures for LED lamps. DOE published a notice of proposed rulemaking (NOPR) on Apr il 9, 2012 to propose test procedures for LED lamps . 77 FR

at 21038. The rulemaking does not include test procedures for OLED lamps; however, as

discussed in section 3 , DOE did not identify any OLED lamps that potentially fall within the scope of this rulemaking and therefore does not believe a test procedure is necessary in advance of prescribing standards for this rulemaking.

DOE has the authority to consider ad ditional lamps that it determines are used to satisfy lighting applications traditi onally served by GSILs (see section 3 for further discussion). (42 U.S.C. 6291(30)(BB)) Because DOE identified additional lamp types that it is considering including in the scope of this rulemaking, including hybrid lamps and sel f

- ballasted mercury vapor lamps, test procedures would need to be established for these lamps, as well as any other lamps not currently covered by a DOE test procedure, prior to an energy conservation standard being prescribed for these lamps.

Item 1 DOE wel comes comment regarding the adoption of test procedures for additional lamp types, including pin base CFLs, hybrid lamps, and self

- ballasted mercury vapor lamps, covered under this rulemaking.

2 The preliminary analysis technical support document for the GSFL and IRL Standards Rulemaking is available at www.regulations.gov/#!documentDetail;D=EERE

- 2011

- BT

- STD

- 0006

- 0022.6

2.3 Preliminary Analyses and Notice of Public Meeting

During the preliminary analysis phase of the rulemaking

, DOE presents the models and tools it will use to conduct the four principal analyses that comprise the preliminary analysis

– the engineering analysis, life

- cycle cost analysis (LCC) , national impact analysis (N IA) , and preliminary manufacturer impact analysis (MIA) . Before conducting the engineering analysis, DOE typically identifies technology options to increase efficiency and then preliminarily

determines whether to retain that option for detailed analysis or to eliminate it from further

consideration. Th e process for consideration of technology options includes a market and technology assessment (section 4 ) and a screening analysis (section 5 ). DOE applies four screening criteria in the screening analysis to determine which technology options to eliminate from further consideration: (1) technological feasibility; (2) practicability to manufacture, install, and service; (3) adverse impacts on product utility or availability; and (4) advers e impacts on health or safety. Technolog y options that remain after screening analysis are referred to as design options in the engineering analysis . DOE consults with interested parties and independent technical experts to identify the design options, eff iciency levels, or key issues that DOE will consider in the rulemaking

.

Next, DOE considers design options or efficiency levels for each product class. DOE

collect s manufacturer cost data, historical shipment data, shipment

- weighted average efficiency data, and preliminary manufacturer impact data ( e.g. , capital conversion expenditures, marketing costs, and research and development costs) based on these design option s or efficiency levels

. DOE then conducts the principal analyses, including: (1) the engineering analysis (section 6); (2)

the LCC and payback period ( PBP ) analyses (section 9 ); (3) the NIA , which considers national energy savings (NES) and consumer net present value (NPV) (section 11 ); and (4) a preliminary

MIA (section 13 ). DOE will present the results of these ana lyses in the preliminary analysis technical support document (TSD).

Based on the results of the preliminary analysis described previously

, DOE selects CSLs from among the energy efficiency levels considered in the preliminary analysis. DOE uses analytical models and tools to assess the different product classes at each CSL analyzed. Many of these analytical models and tools are in the form of spreadsheets, which are also used to conduct the LCC and PBP analyses and to determine the natio nal energy savings and NPV of CSLs. DOE will make the spreadsheet tools used in the preliminary analysis and results of the preliminary analysis available on its website for review. Publication of DOE analysis of various CSLs in the preliminary analysis wi ll enable interest ed parties to review the spreadsheet models ( also posted

on DOE’s website ) that underpin the analyses and provide DOE with comments so that the

models can be refined.

DOE will also make a TSD available containing the details of all the analyses performed to date when it publishes the preliminary analysis. After publication of the preliminary analysis, DOE will provide a public comment period and hold a public meeting. In addition, DOE encourages interested parties to make joint recommendations for CSLs and to submit them to

DOE for consideration

.7

2.4 Notice of Proposed Rule making

In the next stage of rulemaking, the NOPR, DOE generally considers energy efficiency levels or design options that span technologically achievable efficiencies. The range of levels DOE typically analyzes includes:

 The baseline efficiency level (the minimum level) set by the product with the lowest energy efficiency level currently sold on the market for a given category; For product categories wher e minimum federal energy conservation standards already exist, this is typically defined by the existing energy conservation standard;

 The efficacy levels (ELs) with the lowest LCC or greatest LCC savings;

 The highest energy efficiency EL or lowest energy consumption EL that is technologically feasible (maximum technologically feasible [ max tech ] ); and

 E Ls that incorporate technologies of significance or fill in large gaps between other efficiency levels considered.

For the NOPR , DOE re views and considers all the comments received after the publication of the preliminary analysis. This process may result in revisions or refinements to the preliminary analyses, including the engineering analysis and LCC analysis. DOE also will

conduct add itional economic and environmental impact analyses at this stage of the rulemaking. These analyses generally include a consumer LCC subgroup analysis (see section 12 ), a complete manufacturer impact analysis (see section 13 ), a utility impact analysis (see section

14 ), an employment impact analysis (see se ction 15 ), an emissions analysis (see section 16 )

, a monetize d emissions analysis (see section 17 ), and a regulatory impact analysis (see section 18 ).

DOE describe s the methodology used and post s the results of all the analyses on its website for review and comments. Based on comments by stakeholders, further revisions to the analysis may be undertaken. This analytical process ends with the proposal of standard levels in

the NOPR. DOE proposes sta ndard levels based on the trial standard levels (TSLs) analyzed during the NOPR phase of the rulemaking. The NOPR, published in the Federal Register

, document s the evaluation and selection of the proposed standard level(s), along with a discussion

of other TSLs considered but not selected (and the reasons for not selecting them).

The selection process for proposed efficiency standards generally runs as follows. For each product class, DOE will identify the max tech efficiency level. If DOE proposes a level

lower than the max tech level , it will sequentially explain the reasons for eliminating higher levels beginning with the highest level considered. DOE will present the analytical results in the NOPR and the analysis details in an accompanying TSD.

DOE considers many factors in selecting p roposed standards, as described in sectio n 2.1

. These factors and criteria are prescribed by EPCA and take into consideration the impacts of energy conservation standards. In addition, as stated previously, DOE encourages stakeholders to8

make joint recommendations for standard levels. DOE carefully consider s such recommendations in its decision process.

When DOE publishes the NOPR, it will provide the Department of Justice (DOJ) with a copy of the NOPR and TSD to solicit DOJ review o f the impact of the proposed standard levels on competition in the lighting industry. Publication of t he NOPR is followed by a 60

- day public comment period

.

2.5 Final Rule

After the publication of the NOPR, DOE will consider public comments it receives on the proposal and supporting analyses. On the basis of the public comments, DOE will review the supporting analyses and proposed standards and consider modifications where necessary. Before the final rule is issued, DOE also will consider DOJ comments on the NOPR relating to the impacts of the proposed standard levels on competition to determine whether change s to these

standard levels are needed.

The standards rulemaking will conclude with the publication of the final rule. DOE will select the final standard level based on the complete record of the standards rulemaking. The final rule will promulgate the fin al standard level and the compliance date and explain the basis for its selection. The final rule will be accompanied by a final TSD.

2.6 Overview of Analyses for Rulemaking

The purpose of the analyses conducted in support of the standards rulemaking is to e nsure that DOE selects energy conservation standards that achieve the maximum improvement in energy efficiency that is technologically feasible and economically justified, and will result in significant energy savings. Economic justification includes the c onsideration of economic impacts on domestic manufacturers and consumers, national benefits including environmental impacts, issues of consumer utility, and impacts from any lessening of competition. DOE expects

the selection of such standards to achieve t he maximum energy savings that are economically justified without imposing excessive financial burden on any particular party.

Figure 2.6

. 1 summarize s the analytical components of the standards

- setting process. The “analyses” are presented in the center column. Each analysis has a set of “key inputs,” which are data and information required for the analysis. “Approaches” are the methods that DOE will u se to obtain key inputs, which may vary depending on the information in question. For example, some key inputs exist in public databases; DOE will collect other information from stakeholders or experts with special knowledge, and DOE will gather other info rmation in support of this rulemaking. The results of each analysis are “key outputs,” which feed directly into the rulemaking. Arrows indicate the flow of information between the various analyses. DOE ensures a consistent approach to its analyses througho ut the rulemaking by considering each analysis as a part of the overall standards

- setting framework.9

Figure 2.6

. 1 Flow Diagram of Analyses for the GSL Standard s Rulemaking Process

3. SCOPE OF COVERAGE

General service lamps include GSIL s
, CFL s , general service LED lamps, OLED lamps, and any other lamps that the Secretary determines are used to satisfy lighting applications traditionally served by general service incandescent lamps. H owever, th e term gene ral service10

lamp does not include any lighting application or bulb shape excluded from the “general service incandescent lamp” definition, or any general service fluorescent lamp or incandescent reflector lamp. 1 0 CFR 430.2 The following sections discuss each of the lamp types included in the definition of general service lamp in more detail.

3.1 General Service Incandescent Lamps

As stated previously, GSILs are included in the definition of GSL

. The definition of “general servic e incandescent lamp” is provided below:

General service incandescent lamp means a standard incandescent or halogen type lamp that is intended for general service applications; has a medium screw base; has a lumen range of not less than 310 lumens and not more than 2,600 lumens; and is capable of being operated at a voltage range at least partially within 110 and 130 volts; however this definition does not apply to the following incandescent lamps

— (1) An appliance lamp; (2) A black light lamp; (3) A bug la mp; (4) A colored lamp; (5) An infrared lamp; (6) A left

- hand thread lamp; (7) A marine lamp; (8) A marine signal service lamp; (9) A mine service lamp; (10) A plant light lamp; (11) A reflector lamp; (12) A rough service lamp; (13) A shatter

- resistant lam p (including a shatter

- proof lamp and a shatter

- protected lamp); (14) A sign service lamp; (15) A silver bowl lamp; (16) A showcase lamp; (17) A 3

- way incandescent lamp; (18) A traffic signal lamp; (19) A vibration service lamp; (20) A G shape lamp (as defined in ANSI C78.20) (incorporated by reference; see § 430.3) and ANSI C79.1

- 2002 (incorporated by reference; see § 430.3) with a diameter of 5 inches or more; (21) A T shape lamp (as defined in ANSI C78.20) (incorporated by reference; see § 430.3) and ANSI C79.1

- 2002 (incorporated by reference; see § 430.3) and that uses not more than 40 watts or has a length of more than 10 inches; and (22) A B, BA, CA, F, G16

- 1/2, G

- 25, G30, S, or M

- 14 lamp (as defined in ANSI C79.1

- 2002) (incorporated by reference; s ee § 430.3) and ANSI C78.20 (incorporated by reference; see § 430.3) of 40 watts or less.

1 0 CFR 430.211

The Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2012 (Public Law 112

- 74), in relevant part, restricts the use of appropriated funds in connection with several as pects of DOE’s incandescent lamps program. Specifically, section 315 states that none of the funds made available by the Act may be used to implement or enforce section 430.32(x) of title 10, Code of Federal Regulations (CFR). The current standards for GSI Ls are set forth in 10 CFR 430.32(x). Because section 315 appears to curtail any further activity to implement or enforce standards for GSILs

, DOE will not
be includ ing lamps that meet the definition of GSIL in th e GSL rulemaking at this time.

As stated in section 1 , s ection 42 U.S.C. 6295(i)(6)(A)(i)(II) directs DOE to determine whether the exemptions for certain incandescent lamps should be maintained o r discontinued based, in part, on exempted lamp sales collected from manufacturers. In March 2013, DOE reviewed the 2012 sales of rough service lamps, vibration service lamps, 3

- way incandescent lamps, 2,601

- 3,300 lumen general service incandescent lamps, and shatter

- resistant lamps. DOE published a notice of data availability regarding data collection and estimated future unit sales in

which it concluded that these five types of incandescent lamps have not experienced significant growth since their exempti on from federal efficiency standards. 78 FR 15891 (March 13, 2013) Because this assessment indicates no further action is necessary regarding these lamp types, they

will not be included in the GSL rulemaking.

3.2 Compact Fluorescent Lamps

CFLs are also included in the definition of GSL , however the term “compact fluorescent lamp” is not currently defined in the CFR

. Thus, DOE will propose a definition of “ compact fluorescent lamp. ” CFLs can be self

- ballasted ( e.g. , medium base CFLs) or externally ballas ted ( e.g. , pin base CFLs)

. As stated in section 1

, EPAct 2005 amended EPCA by setting energy

conservation standards for MBCFLs

. DOE’s existing energy conservation standards apply only to integrally ballasted (also referred to as self

- ballasted) MBCFLs . 10 CFR 430.32(u) The

definition s of “ medium base compact fluorescent lamp ” and “ self

- ballasted compact fluorescent lamp ” are provid ed below:

Medium base compact fluorescent lamp means an integrally ballasted fluorescent lamp with a medium screw base, a rated input voltage range of 115 to 130 volts and which is designed as a direct replacement for a general service incandescent lamp; however, the

term does not include

— (1) Any lamp that is

— (i) Specifically designed to be used for sp ecial purpose applications; and (ii) Unlikely to be used in general purpose applications, such as the applications

described in the definition of “General Service Incandescent Lamp” in this section; or (2) Any lamp not described in the definition of “General Service Incandescent Lamp” in this section that is excluded by the Secretary , by rule, because the lamp is

— (i) Designe d for special applications; and (ii) Unlikely to be used in general purpose applications.

1 0 CFR 430.212

Self

- ballasted compact fluorescent lamp means a compact fluorescent lamp unit that incorporates, permanently enclosed, all elements that are necessary for the starting and stable operation of the lamp, and does not include any replaceable or interchangeable

parts.

10 CFR part 430 subpart B App endix W

The MBCFLs proposed to be included in this rulemaking will include all lamps that meet

the definition of “ medium base compact fluorescent lamp” stated in 10 CFR 430.2. DOE notes that, as stated in the definition, MBCFLs designed for special purpos e applications and unlikely to be used in general purpose applications are exempt from standards. For determining such non

general applications, the definition specifically references the GSIL definition which lists several lamp types, such as reflector la mps, not considered for use in general service applications. Thus, DOE interprets the GSIL exemptions to also apply to MBCFLs

.

Pin base CFLs are not currently covered by DOE energy conservation standards. DOE considered adopting standards for pin base CFLs in the framework document 3 of the GSFL and IRL Standards Rulemaking . However, i n the preliminary analysis of the GSFL and IRL Standards Rulemaking , DOE concluded that compact fluorescent lamps fall within the definition of “general service lamp

. ” 4 DOE further determined that the term “compact fluorescent lamps” is

not limited to MBCFLs

. DOE concluded that it was intended for DOE to establish standards for lamps categorized as CFLs in a rulemaking separate from GSFLs. DOE therefore determined

CFLs would be considered in the GSL rulemaking, and would include both pin base and medium

base CFLs. For more information on the inclusion of pin base CFLs in this rulemaking, see chapter 2 of the preliminary analysis TSD f or the GSFL and IRL Standards R ulemaking. 5

DOE currently does not have a definition for pin base CFL, however, the term “ pin

based ” is defined in the CFR as follows:

Pin

- based means (1) the base of a fluorescent lamp, that is not integrally ballasted and that has a plug

- in lamp base, including multi

- tube, multibend, spiral, and circline types, or (2) a socket that holds such a lamp.

1 0 CFR 430.2

The definition of GSL explicitly states that the term does not include any lighting application or bulb shape excluded from the GSIL definition or GSFLs . Thus, DOE is considering including all pin base CFLs that serve general lighting applications , do not meet the definition of GSFL, and are not the lamp types or shapes excluded from the GSIL definition

.

3 The framework document for the GSFL and IRL Standards Rulemaking is available at www.regulations.gov/#!documentDetail;D=EERE

- 2011

- BT

- STD

- 0006

- 0002

. 4 Chapter 2 of the preliminary analysis technical support document for the GSFL and IRL Standards Rulemaking is

available at www.regulations.gov/#!documentDetail;D=EERE

- 2011

- BT

- STD

- 0006

- 0022

. 5 Ibid.13

Item 2 DOE welcomes comment on definition s for compact fluorescent lamp and pi n base compact fluorescent lamp

.

3.3 General Service LED and OLED Lamps

G eneral ser vice LED lamps and OLED lamps are included in the definition of GSL. The

definitions for “light

- emitting diode or LED” and “organic light

- emitting diode or OLED ” are as follows:

Light

- emitting diode or LED means a p

- n junction solid state device of whi ch the radiated output, either in the infrared region, the visible region, or the ultraviolet region, is a function of the physical construction, material used, and exciting current of the device.

Organic light

- emitting diode or O LED means a thin

- film li ght

- emitting device that typically consists of a series of organic layers between 2 electrical contacts (electrodes).

1 0 CFR 430.2

DOE proposed a definition for “ LED lamp ” in a test procedure NOPR for LED lamps (hereafter “LED TP NOPR”). 77 FR 21038 (April 9, 2012). The proposed definition is as

follows:

L ight

- emitting diode lamp means an integrated LED lamp as defined in ANSI/IESNA

RP

- 16 (incorporated by refe rence; see §430.3).

As stated in the LED TP NOPR, the ANSI/IESNA standard defines integrate d LED lamps as comprising the LED source (the LED packages [ components ] or LED arrays [ modules ] ), LED driver, ANSI st andard base, and other optical, thermal, mechanical and

electrical comp onents such as phosphor layers, insulati ng materials, fasteners to h old

compo nents within the lamp together, and ele ctrical wiring. The LED lamp is intended to connect directly to a branch circu it through a corresponding ANSI standard socket. 77 FR at 21041 (April 9, 2012).

Although 10 CFR 430.2 defines the term “light

- emitting diode or LED” and DOE has proposed a definition for “light

- emitting diode lamp,” DOE does not currently have a definition

for “ general service LED lamp .” As stated previously, the definition of GSL explicitly states that

the defini tion does not include any lighting application or bulb shape excluded from the GSIL

definition . Thus, DOE is considering including in the scope of this rulemaking all LEDs that serve general lighting applications and are not the lamp types or shapes exclud ed from the GSIL

definition.

As previously mentioned, the term general service lamp includes OLED lamps. OLEDs

are diffuse light sources made of thin layers of carbon

- based semiconductor material. The layer

based construction tends to support development of large, flat surfaces rather than traditional lamp shapes. Because OLEDs are a n emerging technology, the commercial availability of

OLEDs is very limited . Further, products that are available are not used in general lighting14

applications due to their size and shape

. The OLEDs that are available are marketed for accent lighting, interior design, or are sold integrated into fixtures. In addition, due to the emerging nature of the technology and the l imited commercial availability of OLEDs, it is unclear whether the efficacy of existing OLED products can be improved

. For these reasons , DO E is considering excluding OLED lamps in this rulemaking.

Item 3 DOE welcomes comment on a definition for general service LED lamp

.

Item 4 DOE welcomes comment on the commercial availability of OLED lamps that can serve in general lighting applications

, and DOE’s consideration to exclude OLED lamps in this rulemaking.

3.4 Additional Lamps

Pursuant to the definition of GSL

, DOE has the authority to consider additional lamps that it determines are used to satisfy lighting applications traditionally served by GSILs

. The

definition of GSIL stated previously

, indicates that these lamps are : (1) typically intended for general service applications ; (2) have a medium screw base ; (3) emit between 310 and 2,600

lumens ; and (4) are capable of being operated at a voltage range at least partially within 110 and

130 V. See 10 CFR 430.2 DOE defines the te rm “ general lighting application ” as follows:

G eneral lighting application means lighting that provides an interior or exterior area with

overall illumination.

10 CFR 430.2

Thus, l amps that meet the four criteria outlined in the definition of GSIL are proposed to be included in the scope of coverage regardless of the technology used to produce light.

DOE surveyed the market and found additional lamp technologies it believes are intended to serve in general lighting applications. DOE found lamps that u tilize more than one technology to produce light ( sometimes known as hybrid lamps) . These hybrid lamps typically use one lighting technology for the primary application and another lighting technology to provide supplemental lighting. Specifically, DOE ide ntified lamps that use a CFL as the primary lighting

source and also contain a halogen capsule

. The halogen capsule resides inside the CFL spiral and

allows for instant illumination when first turned on. After the CFL reach es its full lumen output,

the hal ogen capsule is turned off. Additionally, DOE identified lamps that use a CFL as the primary lighting source and also contain an LED. The CFL is used for general lighting applications and the LED is mounted inside the CFL spiral to provide a nightlight functionality.

In addition, DOE identified a lamp type intended for general service application s that

utilize s a technology not explicitly stated in the definition of general service lamp (i.e.

, incandescent, compact fluorescent, LED, OLED)

. Specifically, DOE found self

- ballasted mercury vapor lamp s that ha ve medium screw bases, lumen output s between 1,100 and 2,550 lumens, operate at 120 volts, and are marketed as replacements for GSILs

.15

Item 5 DOE welcomes comment on a definition for hybrid lamp.

Item 6 DOE welcomes comment on additional lamp types that should be considered in the scope of this rulemaking

.

Item 7 DOE welcomes comment on any lamp s that should not be considered within the scope of this rulemaking

. If such a lamp is identified, DOE requests specific information on why the lamp should not be considered and performance characteristics of the lamp.

4. MARKET AND TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMEN T

The market and technology assessment will provide information about the manufacturers

of GSLs , and specif

ics about the performance attributes of these lamps. This assessment is used

to develop product classes and identify technology options to improve lamp efficacy for each of the lamp types. EPCA defines “ l amp efficacy ” as the lumen output of a lamp divided by its wattage, expressed in lumens per watt.

4.1 Market Assessment Overview

As part of the market assessment, DOE will qualitatively and quantitatively characterize

the structure of the GSL market. DOE will identify and characterize the manufacturers, estim ate market shares and trends, address regulatory and non

- regulatory initiatives intended to improve the energy efficiency or reduce the energy consumption of covered lamps, and explore the potential for technological improvements in the design and manufact uring of such products.

This market assessment will serve as a resource to guide the analyses that follow. For example, DOE may use historical shipments and prices as an indicator of future shipments and prices. Similarly, DOE plans to use market structu re data for the manufacturer impact analysis, data which will be particularly useful for assessing competitive impacts. This phase also allows DOE to start updating design options by reviewing product literature and industry publications.

DOE recognizes that there may be limited public information regarding recent trends in national shipments, manufacturing costs, channels of distribution, and manufacturers’ market

shares of GSLs . This type of data is an important input for analyses that determine if energy conservation standards are economically justified and will result in significant energy savings. Therefore, DOE encourages stakeholders to submit data that pertains to these is sues and would

aid DOE’s understanding of trends in the GSL market.

S takeholders may submit confidential data to DOE, indicating in writing which data

should remain confidential. T o prevent public disclosure of the data due to actions taken by a

third party, stakeholders providing confidential information to DOE must submit that data according to 10 CFR 1004.11. Under 10 CFR 1004.11, any person submitting information that he or she believes to be confidential and exempt by law from public disclosure sho uld submit two copies. One copy of the document shall include all the information believed to be confidential, and the other copy of the document shall have the information believed to be

confidential deleted. DOE will make its own determination about the confidential status of the16

information and treat it according to its determination. DOE prepare s aggregated results from the

data submitted for use in DOE’s analys e s. These aggregated results do not divulge the sensitive nature of the individual raw data, but enable other stakeholders to review and comment on the aggregated dataset.

Item 8 DOE welcomes information on shipments, product

- feature and efficiency trends, distribution channels and estimates of market shares for the lamps considered in this

rulem aking. F

or the data to be used to conduct energy savings calculations, please provide appropriate groupings (e.g., by technology, wattage , and/or other relevant performance characteristics )

.

4.2 Product Classes

DOE divides covered product s into classes by: (a) the type of energy used; (b) the capacity of the product; or (c) any other performance

- related feature that justifies different standard levels, such as features affecting consumer utility. (42 U.S.C. 6295(q)) DOE is considering estab lishing separate product classes for GSLs based on the following three factors: (1) ballast location 6 ( i.e., self

- ballasted versus externally ballasted lamps ); (2) cover ( i.e., covered versus bare lamps); and (3) dimmability.

Ballast location refer s to the use of integrated ballasts ( i.e., self

- ballasted) or non

integrated ballast s ( i.e., externally ballasted) . DOE notes that self

- ballasted lamps may have

lower inherent efficiency compared to lamps that utilize external ballasts due to the additional components and circuit ry integrated into a self

- ballasted lamp

. The use of a self

- ballasted lamp

can be advantageous in that a consumer need only replace one lamp unit rather than two separate

components. Self

- ballasted lamps are also generally more compa ct and thus can be used in

ap plications with size constraints.

The presence of a cover over the main light source can also affect lamp efficacy

. Some lamps incorporate a n added glass or silicone cover over the light source . However, this cover can reduce the lumen output of the lamp. Covered lamps may offer utility to consumers as they more closely resemble traditional lighting technologies and are frequently utilized where a lamp is

visible

.

Lastly, the ability of a lamp to be dimmed can impact lamp efficacy. D immable lamps could have a lower efficacy because of the added circuitry necessary for dimming functionality

and the inclusion of cathode heat . For certain technologies, such as CFLs and LED lamps, not all products are marketed as capable of being dimmed. Thus a lamp that can be dimmed may offer unique performance characteristics and provide a utility to consumers.

Because DOE believes the features listed could affect lamp efficacy and may also offer a

distinct utility to consumers , DOE is considering establishing eight separate product classes

based on these three features.

6 The term “ballast location” is used interchangeably to refer to both ballasts and drivers. Thus, in the context of this rulemaking the term is not limited to CFL technology.17

Table 4.2

. 1

. Product Classes under Consideration for GS L s
Ballast Location Dimmability Cover

Self

- ballasted Dimmable Bare

Covered

Non

- dimmable Bare

Covered

Externally ballasted Dimmable Bare

Covered

Non

- dimmable Bare

Covered

Item 9 DOE welcomes comment on the product class divisions it is considering for general service lamps. In particular

, DOE welcomes comment on the impact that ballast

location and dimmability have on the efficacy of compact fluorescent lamps and LED lamps. DOE also welcomes comment on the utility offered by self

- ballasted

, covered

, and dimmable lamps

.

Item 10 DOE welcomes comment on any other class

- setting factors that should be considered

in th e analysis.

Item 11 DOE welcomes comment on a definition for the term “covered” that is applicable across technologies.

4.3 Technology Assessment

The technol ogy assessment centers on understanding how energy is used by the product, and what changes are possible that would reduce energy consumption. Measures that improve the energy efficiency of the products are called technology options, and they are based on existing technologies, as well as working prototype s . DOE develops a list of technology options

, which are then considered against four screening criteria discussed in the following section. Those technology options that pass the four screening criteria ar e called design options and will

be considered as ways to improv e the efficacy of the products in the engineering analysis and

will as sist DOE in determining the max tech design.

DOE reviewed manufacturer catalogs, recent trade publications, technical journals, and patent filings to determine technology options. Table 4.3

. 1 pre sent s the technology options DOE

has preliminarily identified to improve the efficacy of general service lamps. DOE notes in Table

4.3

. 1 the applicable lamp type for the technology options listed

.18

Table 4.3

. 1 GSL Technology Options

Lamp Type Name of Technology Option Description

GSIL Higher Temperature

Operation Operating the filament at higher temperatures, the spectral output shifts to lower wavelengths, increasing its overlap with the eye sensitivity curve.

Microcavity Filaments Texturing, surface perforations, microcavity holes with material fillings.

Novel Filament Materials More

- efficacious filament alloys that have a high melting point, low vapor pressure, high strength, high ductility, or good radiating characteristics.

Thinner Filaments Thinner filaments to increase operating temperature. This measure may shorten the operating life of the lamp.

Efficient Filament Coiling Coiling the filament to increase surface area, thus increasing light output.

Crystallite Filament Coatings Layers of micron or submicron crystallites deposited on the filament surface that increases emissivity of the

filament.

Efficient Filament

Orientation Positioning (horizontal or vertical) the incandescent filament to increase light emission from the lamp. Vertical orientation, used by majority of lamps, allows for greater light emission. Higher Efficiency Inert Fill

Gas Filling lamps with alternative gases, such as Krypton,

to reduce heat conduction.

Electron Stimulated

Luminescence A low voltage cathodoluminescent phosphor that emits green light (visible region of light) upon impingement by thermally ejected electrons, increasing the lumen output. Higher Pressure Tungsten

Halogen Lamps Increased halogen bulb capsule pressurization.

Non

- Tungsten

- Halogen Regenerative Cycles Novel filament materials that regenerate.

Change in Technology Replace GSIL with CFL or LED technology.

CFL Highly Emissive Electrode

Coatings Improved electrode coatings will allow electrons to be more easily removed from electrodes, reducing lamp power and increase overall efficacy.

Higher Efficiency Lamp Fill Gas Composition Fill gas compositions to improve cathode thermionic emission or increase mobility of ions and electrons in the lamp plasma.

Higher Efficiency Phosphors Techniques to increase the conversion of ultraviolet (UV) light into visible light.

Glass Coatings Coatings on inside of bulb enabling the phosphors to absorb more UV energy, so that they emit more visible light.

Multi

- Photon Phosphors Emitting more than one visible photon for each incident UV photon.

Cold Spot Optimization Improve cold spot design to maintain optimal temperature and improve light output. Improved Ballast Components Use of higher

- grade components to improve efficiency of integrated ballasts. Improved Ballast Circuit Design Better circuit design to improve efficiency of integrated ballasts.
Change in Technology Replace CFL with LED technology.19

Lamp Type Name of Technology Option Description

LED Efficient Down Converters New high

- efficiency wavelength conversion materials,
including quantum

- dots and nano

- phosphors, have the
potential for creating warm

- white LEDs with
improved spectral efficiency, high color quality, and
improved thermal stability.

Improved Package

Architectures Novel package architectures such as RGB+, system

in

- package, hybrid color, and chip

- on

- heat

- sink have
the potential to improve thermal management, color

efficiency, optical distribution, as well as electrical
integration to greatly improve ov erall lamp and
luminaire efficiency.

Improved Emitter Materials The development of efficient red, green, or amber
LED emitters, will allow for optimization of spectral
efficiency with high color quality over a range of
correlated color temperature (CCT) and which also
exhibit color and efficiency stability with respect to
operating temperature.

Alternative Substrate

Materials Alternative substrates such as gallium nitride (GaN),
silicon (Si), GaN

- on

- Si, and silicon carbide to enable
high

- quality epitaxy for improved device quality and
efficiency.

Improved Thermal Interface

Material (TIM) Develop TIMs that enable high efficiency thermal
transfer for long

- term reliability and performance
optimization of the LED device and overall lamp
product.

Optimized Heat Sink Design Improve thermal conductivity and heat dissipation
from the LED chip thus reducing efficacy loss from
rises in junction temperature.

Active Thermal
Management Systems Devices such as internal fans, vibrating membranes,

and circulated liquid cooling systems to improve
thermal dissipation from the LED chip.

Device Level Optics Integration of specific lens into the primary optic of
the LED package allowing for the removal of
secondary optics and eliminating losses due to

abso rption at additional interfaces.

Increased Light Utilization Reduce optical losses from the lamp housing,
diffusion, beam shaping and color

- mixing to increase
the efficiency of the LED lamp.

Improved Driver Design Increase driver efficiency through novel and
intelligent circuit design.

AC LEDs Reduce or eliminate the requirements of a driver and
therefore the effect of driver efficiency on lamp
efficacy

.

DOE is aware that some attempts to improve lamp efficacy may also modify lamp performance or other lamp characteristics. For example, incandescent lamps operating filaments at higher temperatures can increase lamp efficacy but may also shorten the operating life of the20

lamp. DOE will consider these tradeoffs in the subsequent analyses and will eliminate any technology options that increase efficacy by decrease lamp ing lifetime such that they have a significant adverse impact on utility, pursuant to the screening criteria discussed below

.

Item 12 DOE welcomes comments on the preliminary technology options it is considering for

this rule and whether there are additional technology options that should be

considered

. DOE also requests information on the feasibility, performance, impacts, and cost of the technology options

.

5. SCREENING ANALYSIS

The purpose of the screening analysis is to screen out technologies that will not be considered further in the analysis. After making an initial list of technologies (during the market and technology assessment), DOE will review and evaluate each technology based on the following four criteria, as specified by 10 CFR part 430, subpart C, Appendix A, sections 4(a)(4) and 5(b):

1. Technologic al feasibility

. DOE will consider technologies incorporated in commercial products or in working prototypes to be technologically feasible.

2. Practicability to manufacture, install, and service

. If mass production and reliable installation and servicing of a technology in commercial products could be achieved on the scale necessary to serve the relevant market at the time the standard requires compliance, then DOE will consider that technology practicable to manufacture, install,

and service.

3. Adverse impact s on product or equipment utility to consumers or availability . If DOE determines a technology would have a significant adverse impact on the utility of the product to significant subgroups of consumers, or would result in the unavailability of any covered product type with performance characteristics (including reliability), features, sizes, capacities, and volumes that are substantially the same as products generally available in the United States at the time, it will not consider that technology

further.

4. Adverse impacts on health or safety

. If DOE determines that a technology will have significant adverse impacts on health or safety, it will not consider that technology

further.

DOE will fully document its reasons for eliminating any technology options during the screening analysis, and will publish this documentation for stakeholder review and comment as part of the preliminary analysis. Those technology options not screened out by the se four criteria are called “design options” and are considered as p ossible methods of improving efficacy in the engineering analysis.

Item 13 DOE welcomes comments on the applicability of the four screening criteria to the technolog y options listed in section 4.3

.

Item 14 DOE welcomes comments on how the four screening criteria might apply to any additional technology option(s) than an interested party recommends to DOE.21

6. ENGINEERING ANALYSIS

6.1 Overview

The engineering analysis identifies potential, increasing efficacy levels above the level of the baseline model for each product class. Those technologies not eliminated in the screening analysis (design optio ns) are inputs to this process. In energy conse rvation standard rulemakings for other products, DOE typically develops cost

- efficiency relationships in the engineering analysis. For this rulemaking, DOE is considering develop ing efficacy levels in the engineering analysis and end

- user prices in a product price determination. By combining the results of the engineering analysis and the product price determination, DOE will derive typical inputs for use

in the LCC and NIA. See section 8 of this framework document for further details on the product price determination.

The following is a summary of the steps DOE plans to take in th e engineering analysis:

• Step 1: Select Representative Product Classes

• Step 2: Select Baseline Lamps

• Step 3: Identify Higher

- Efficacy Lamp Replacements

• Step 4: Develop Efficacy Levels.

The following sections discuss each of these steps in more detail

.

Item 15 DOE welcomes comments on the overall methodology for the e ngineering analysis.

6.2 Representative Product Classes

As discussed previously in this framework document, DOE is considering establishing eight product classes for GSLs . DOE is not planning to directly analyze every product class. Instead, DOE will select certain product classes to analyze, and then scale its analytical findings for those representative product classes to other product classes that are not analyzed. DOE typically cho o se s representative product classes based on the highest shipment volumes.

As discussed in section 4.2

, DOE is considering establishing separate pro duct classes for general service lamps based on the following three factors: (1) ballast location ( i.e., s elf

- ballasted versus externally ballasted); (2) cover ( i.e., covered versus bare lamps); and (3) dimmability. Based on preliminary research of manufacturer catalogs and market reports, DOE found that

self

- ballasted products are more common tha n externally ballasted products for all technologies. With the exception of self

- ballasted CFLs, DOE found that dimmable products are more

common than n on

- dimmable products. Lastly, based on a survey of the market and a review of market reports

, 7 DOE believes that when applicable

, bare lamps are more common than covered

7 U.S. Department of Energy. Energy Star CFL Market Profile

– Data Trends and Market Insights. September 2010. Prepared for the United St ates Department of Energy by D&R International, Ltd. U.S. Department of Energy: Washington, D.C. www.energystar.gov/ia/products/downloads/CFL_Market_Profile_2010.pdf

.22

lamps

. As mentioned previously, DOE will also utilize information on shipment volumes when determining representative product classes.

Item 16 DOE welcomes comments on the identification and selection of product classes with the highest shipment volume to be analyze d as representative for this rulemaking. In particular, DOE requests shipment information for lamps included in the scope of this rulemaking broken down by ballast location , cover, dimmability, and any other features deemed relevant by interested parties.

Item 17 DOE welcomes comment on whether the characteristics of products with the highest shipment volume change depending on lamp technology.

6.3 Baseline Lamps

Once DOE identifies the representative product classes for analysis, DOE selects representative units (baseline lamps) from within the representative product classes. These

basel ine lamps are generally what DOE believes to be the most

- common, least

- efficacious lamps in their respective product classes.

DOE plans to establish baseline lamps by analyzing manufacturer catalogs and compliance and c er t ification data to determine the most common, least efficacious lamps that just me e t existing standards. For products that do not have existing energy conservation standards, DOE will select the most common, least efficacious lamp sold in a given product

class

. Cert ain products proposed to be covered under the scope of this rulemaking have existing energy conservation standards. Standard spectrum GSILs must have a color rendering index (CRI) greater than or equal to 80 and meet the requirements in Table 6.1 . Modified spectrum

GSILs must have a CRI greater than or equal to 75 and meet the requirements in Table 6.2

. Table

6. 3

. 3 lists the existing standards for medium base compact fluorescent lamps

.

Table 6.3

. 1 Standards for Standard Spectrum General Service Incandescen t Lamps

Rated Lumen Ranges Maximum Rated Wattage Minimum Rated Lifetime Effective Date

1490

- 2600 72 1,000 hrs 1/1/2012

1050

- 1489 53 1,000 hrs 1/1/2013

750

- 1049 43 1,000 hrs 1/1/2014

310

- 749 29 1,000 hrs 1/1/2014

Table 6.3

. 2 Standards for Modified Spectrum General Service Incandescent Lamps

Rated Lumen R anges Maximum Rated W attage Minimum R ate d Life time Effective D ate

1118

- 1950 72 1,000 hrs 1/1/2012

788

- 1117 53 1,000 hrs 1/1/2013

563

- 787 43 1,000 hrs 1/1/2014

232

- 562 29 1,000 hrs 1/1/201423

Table 6. 3

. 3 Standards for Medium Base Compact Fluorescent Lamps

Factor Requirements

Lam p Power (Watts) & Configuration 1 Minimum Efficacy: lumens/watt ( Based upon initial lumen data). 2

Bare Lamp:

Lamp Power <15 45.0.

Lamp Power ≥15 60.0.

Covered Lamp (no reflector):

Lamp Power <15 40.0.

15≥Lamp Power

<19 48.0.

19≥Lamp Power

<25 50.0

Lamp Power ≥25 55.0.

1,000

- hour Lumen

Maintenance The average of at least 5 lamps must be a minimum 90.0% of initial (100

- hour)

lumen output @ 1,000 hours of rated life.

Lumen Maintenance 80.0% of initial (100

- hour) rating at 40 percent of rated life (per ANSI C78.5 Clause 4.10).

Rapid Cycle Stress Test Per ANSI C78.5 and IESNA LM

- 65 (clauses 2,3,5, and 6). Exception: Cycle times must be 5 minutes on, 5 minutes off. Lamp will be cycled once for every two hours of rated life. At least 5 lamps must meet or exceed the minimum number of cycles.

Average Rated Lamp Life ≥ 6, 000 hours as declared by the manufacturer on packaging. At 80% of rated life, statistical methods may be used to confirm lifetime claims based on sampling performance.

1 Take performance and electrical requirements at the end of the 100

- hour aging period according to ANSI Standard C78.5. The lamp efficacy shall be the average of the lesser of the lumens per watt measured in the base up and/or other specified positions. Use wattages place on packaging to select proper specification efficacy in this table, n ot measured wattage. Labeled wattages are for reference only.

2 Efficacies are based on measured values for lumens and wattages from pertinent test data. Wattages and lumens placed on packages may not be used in calculation and are not governed by this spe cification. For multi

- level or dimmable systems, measurements shall be at the highest setting. Acceptable measurement error is ±3%.

Item 18 DOE welcomes comments on its proposed approach for selecting baseline lamps in this rulemaking

.

6.4 Identify Higher

- Efficacy Lamp Replacements

DOE selects more efficacious lamps for each baseline lamp by considering technologies not eliminated in the screening analysis. DOE considers these technologies in the engineering analysis, either by modeling potential ef ficacy improvements due to the design options or by analyzing commercially available lamps in which the design options are incorporated. In24

identifying more efficacious lamp or lamp

- and

- ballast designs, DOE recognizes that a lamp’s lumen package and performance characteristics are important design criteria for consumers. DOE chooses substitute lamps with performance characteristics similar to those of the baseline lamps.

DOE plans to ac count for lumen output when it establishe s lamp designs for its analyses

because consumers take lumen package into consideration when purchasing lamps

. In its analysis, DOE considers lamps that emit lumens equal to the lumen output of the baseline lamp,

or within 10 p ercent of that lumen output. In identifying more efficacious substitutes, DOE plans

to use a database of commercially available lamps.

Item 19 DOE welcomes comments on the methodology it is considering to select higher

- efficacy lamp designs

.

6.5 Efficacy Levels

After identifying the more efficacious substitutes for each baseline lamp or lamp

- and

ballast system, DOE is considering developing ELs based on three factors: (1) the design options associated with the specific lamps being studied ( e.g. , grades of phosphor for CFLs, effici ent phosphor converters for LED lamps

, etc.); (2) the ability of lamps across wattages to comply with the EL of a given product class; 8 and (3) the maximum technologically feasible efficacy

level. DOE plans to use catal og data on commercially available lamps to develop continuous equations that repre sent the potential efficacy achieved by a particular design option across all

wattages

.

When possible, DOE will consider data submitted to DOE by manufacturers for the purpose of compliance with existing energy conservation standards as well as verification testing, such as the LED Lighting Facts Verification Program, 9 when establishing minimum efficacy requirements for each EL

.

Item 20 DOE welcomes comments on its proposed met hodology of establishing efficacy levels

. In particular, DOE requests comments on the appropriateness of using an equation

- based approach to reflect the relationship between efficacy and wattage for all covered lamp technologies

.

Item 21 DOE welcomes comment on the use of compliance data and verification testing data when establishing efficacy levels.

6.6 Scaling to Product Classes Not Analyzed

As mentioned previously, DOE plans to select certain product classes as representative and concentrate its analytical ef fort on those classes. Standards for non

- representative product

8 Efficacy levels span multiple lamps of different wattages. In selecting ELs, DOE consid ered whether lamps of different wattages can meet the levels of efficiency prescribed by those ELs.

9 Information on the DOE’s LED Lighting Facts Verification Program including a database of tested products can be

found at www.lightingfacts.com/

.25

classes are determined by scaling standards from product classes that were directly analyzed.

DOE will develop scaling factors for GS Ls by comparing the efficacy level of the representative

pr oduct class es to efficacies of commercially available lamps from the non

- representative product class es

.

Item 22 DOE welcomes comments on the methodology to scale to products not directly analyzed.

6.7 Proprietary Designs

DOE will consider in its engineering and economic analyses all design options that are commercially available or present in a working prototype, including proprietary designs, that meet the screening criteria discussed in section 5 . However, DOE will consider a proprietary design in the subsequent analyses only if it does not represent a unique path to a given efficiency level. If the proprietary des ign is the only approach available to achieve a given efficiency level, then DOE will eliminate the efficiency level from further analysis. DOE will reject a standard

level that can be met only with a proprietary technology because it could result in an an ti

competitive market, a principle consistently applied in past DOE rulemakings as economically unjustifiable. However, if a given energy efficiency level can be achieved by a number of design approaches, including a proprietary design, DOE will continue t o examine the given efficiency

level.

DOE is aware of manufacturer concerns about proprietary designs and will take steps to maintain the confidentiality of any proprietary data provided by manufacturers. This information will provide input to the compet itive impacts assessment and other economic analyses.

Item 23 DOE welcomes comments on proprietary designs i t should be aware of for the GS L s that are the subject of this rulemaking.

6.8 Outside Regulatory Changes Affecting the Engineering Analysis

In conducting an engineering analysis, DOE considers the effects of regulat ions outside DOE’s statutory energy conservation standards rulemaking process that can affect manufacturers of the covered products. Some regulatory requirements can also affect the ef ficacy or energy consumption of the covered lamps. DOE will attempt to identify other regulatory requirements that could affect the engineering analysis. The consideration of these requirements is closely related to the cumulative regulatory burden assessment that DOE will conduct as part of the manufacturer impact analysis. Based on consideration of the comments received on the engineering analysis, DOE will make any necessary changes to its analysis.

Item 24 DOE welcomes comments on regulatory burdens or changes that should be considered in the engineering analysis.

Item 25 DOE welcomes comments on other issues that could affect the engineering analysis.26

7. ENERGY USE CHARACTER IZATION

The purpose of the energy

- use characterization is to identify how products are used by consumers, and thereby determine the energy savings potential of energy efficiency improvements. DOE determines the energy consumption of lamps and lamp

- and

- ballast systems through the rated power ( i.e., the rate of energy they consume ) and the way consumers use the lamp ( i.e., operating hours per year). This analysis, which is meant to represent typical energy consumption in the field, is an input to both the LCC and PBP analyses and the NIA. DOE derives the annual energy consumption of lamps a nd lamp

- and

- ballast systems by multiplying the power rating by the number of hours of operation per year.

DOE plans to use the 2010 U.S. Lighting Market Characterization (LMC) 10 to determine operating hours. The LMC is based on thousands of building audits and surveys and provides

national

- level data on operating hours by building type and lamp type for all sectors. W ithin the residential sector, the distribution i s broken down by room type. In conjunction with data from the LMC, DOE plans to use data from the recent versions of Energy Information Administration’s (EIA) 2003 Commercial Building Energy Consumption Survey (CBECS) 11

, 2009 Residential Energy Consumption Survey (RECS) 12

, and 2006 Manufacturing Energy Consumption Survey (MECS). 13 These EIA studies provide information on the distribution of buildings within the U.S., by building type and c ensus d ivision. DOE plans to use the LMC’s operating hour data by building type and the EIA’s data by building type and c ensus d ivision to

derive annual operating hours by c ensus d ivision. This would allow DOE to correlate the electricity price distribution and sales tax distribution with the operating hour distribution by

c ensus d ivision in the LCC spreadsheet.

Item 26 DOE welcomes comments on the methodology it is considering to determine energy use. In particular, DOE requests comments on its approach to calculate operating hours for the covered lamps.

8. PRODUCT PRICE DETERMINATION

The purpose o f the engineering analysis and product price determination together is to provide an analysis of the relationship between the efficacy and end

- user price for GS L s. DOE

intends to obtain manufacturers’ published end

- user price schedules for lamps (hereafter called the manufacturer’s “blue book” or “lamp price schedules”) as well as information on discounts applied to those price schedules for potential distribution channels such as State procurement

10 U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, Energy Conservation Program for Consumer Products: 2010 U.S. Lighting Market Characterization (2012). Available at: http://apps1.eere.ener gy.gov/buildings/publications/pdfs/ssl/2010

- lmc

- final

- jan

- 2012.pdf

. 11 U.S. Department of Energy, Energy Information Administration, Commercial Building Energy Consumption Survey: Micro

- level data, file 2 Building Activities, Special Measures of Size, and M ulti

- building Facilities (2003). Available at: www.eia.doe.gov/emeu/cbecs/public_ use.html.

12 U.S. Department of Energy, Energy Information Administration, Residential Energy Consumption Survey: File 1: Housing Unit Characteristic (2006). Available at: www.eia.doe.gov/emeu/recs/recs2001/publicuse2001.html.

13 U.S. Department of Energy, Energy Information Administration. Manufacturing Energy Consumption Survey, Table 9.1: Enclosed Floorspace and Nu mber of Establishment Buildings ( 2006 ) Available at: www.eia.gov/emeu/mecs/mecs2006/2006tables.html

.27

contracts, large electrical supply distributors, home impr ovement/hardware stores, and other

sources o f publicly available end

- user prices, such as Internet retailers.

For similar lamp technologies, DOE has observed a range of end

- user prices paid for a given lamp, depending on the distribution channel through which it was purchased and the volume at which it was purchased. Thus , DOE intends to calculat e three sets of discounts from the blue books, representing the range of low, medium, and high lamp prices for GSL s

. T he

discounts DOE applie s to blue book prices to derive the low, medium, and high prices are a constant markdown across all lamps. For those lamps where commercial (blue book) pricing are not available, DOE extrapolate s pricing from available lamps. Once DOE calculate s end

- user prices, DOE add s sales tax and, if appropriate, installation costs to derive the total, installed end

user cost.

In addition, as part of the product price determination DOE is considering conduct ing a price trends analysis. As noted in a Notice of Data Availability published b y DOE, e conomic literature and historical data suggest that the real costs of many covered products have trended

downward over t ime according to ‘‘experience’’ curves. 76 FR 9696, 9697 (Feb. 22, 2011) . DOE will investigate various methods for forecasting future prices of GS L s

.

Item 27 DOE welcomes comments on the methodology it is considering for lamp prices for this rulemaking.

Item 28 DOE welcomes comment on the distribution channels utilized for the lamp technologies covered in this rulemaking and if the channe ls vary by technology. In particular, DOE requests comment on the appropriateness of the potential distribution channels identified

, specifically State procurement contracts, large electrical supply distributors,

home improvement/hardware stores , and inte rnet retailers

.

Item 29 DOE welcomes comment on the availability of blue books or price schedules for the lamp technologies covered in this rulemaking, particularly LED lamps.

Item 30 DOE also welcomes comment on price forecasting methodologies for GSLs

.

9. LIFE

- CYCL E COST AND PAYBACK P ERIOD ANALYSIS

The effects of increased energy conservation standards on consumers include a change in their operating expenses (usually decreased) and a change in the purchase price (usually increased). The LCC of a product is the cost a product incurs over its lifetime , taking into account both purchase price, operating costs (including energy expenditures), and installation costs. The PBP represents the time it takes to recover the additional installed cost of the more

efficient product through annual operating cost sa vings. DOE analyzes the net effect on consumers by calculating the LCC and PBP using the engineering performance data (section 6 ), the energy

- use da ta (section 7 ), and the product price determination (section 8 ). Inputs to the LCC calculation include the installed cost to the consumer (purchase price plus installation cost), operating expenses (energy expenses, and, if applicable, repair costs and maintenance costs), the lifetime of the p roduct or other defined period of analysis, and a discount rate. Inputs to the PBP28

calculation include the installed cost to the consumer and annual operating costs. DOE will conduct the LCC and PBP analyses using a spreadsheet mod el developed in Microsoft Excel

. When combined with the Crystal Ball model (a commercially available software program), the LCC and PBP model generates a Monte Carlo 14 simulation to perform the analysis by incorporating uncertainty and variability considerations.

DOE is consideri ng incorporating a residual value calculation to account for any remaining lifetime of lamps at the end of the analysis period. The residual value is an estimate of the product’s value to the consumer at the end of the life

- cycle cost analysis period. T his residual value recognize s that a lamp system may continue to function beyond the end of the analysis period. DOE calculates the residual value by linearly prorating the product’s initial cost consistent with the methodology described in the Life

- Cycle Cos ting Manual for the Federal Energy Management Program

. 15

DOE plan s to use a “simple” PBP for this rulemaking which is the ratio of the increase in purchase cost ( i.e. , from a less efficient design to a more efficient design) to the decrease i n annual oper ating expenditures. The “simple ” PBP does not take into account other changes in operating expenses over time or the time value of money , and is calculated at an effective

discount rate of zero . As inputs to the PBP analysis, DOE uses the total installed c ost of the product to the consumer for each efficacy level, as well as the first year annual operating costs for each efficacy level. The calculation requires the same inputs as the LCC, except for energy price trends and discount rates; only energy prices for the year the standard takes effect are

needed.

Section 325(o)(2)(B)(iii) of EPCA states that there is a rebuttable presumption that an energy conservation standard is economically justified if the increased installed cost for a product that meets th e standard is less than three times the value of the first

- year energy savings resulting from the standard, as calculated under the applicable DOE test procedure. (42 U.S.C. 6295(o)(2)(B)(iii)) DOE’s LCC and PBP analyses generate values that calculate the payback period for consumers of potential energy conservation standards, which includes, but is not limited to, the three

- year payback period contemplated under the rebuttable presumption test. However, DOE routinely conducts a full economic analysis that considers the full range of impacts, including those to the consumer, manufacturer, nation, and environment, as required under 42 U.S.C. 6295(o)(2)(B)(i). The results of this analysis serve as the basis for DOE to evaluate the economic justification for a potential standard level (thereby supporting or rebutting the results of any preliminary determination of economic justification).

Item 31 DOE welcomes comments on the approach it is considering to conduct the LCC and PBP analyses.

14 Monte Carlo simulations model uncertainty by utilizing probability distributions instead of single values for certain inputs and variables.

15 Fuller, Sieglinde K. and Stephen R. Peterson, National Institute of Standards and Technology Handbook 135 (1996 Edition); Life

- Cycle Costing Manual for the Federal Energy Management Program (Prepared for U. S. Department of Energy, Federal Energy Managemen t Program, Office of the Assistant Secretary for Conservation and Renewable Energy)(Feb. 1996). Available at: http://fire.nist.gov/bfrlpubs/build96/PDF/b96121.pdf

.29

10. SHIPMENTS ANALYSIS

DOE forecasts product shipment s to calculate the national impacts of standards on energy consumption, NPV, and future manufacturer cash flows. DOE plans to develop shipments projections based on analysis of the key market drivers for GSLs.

10.1 Base Case Forecast and Accounting Methodology

To evaluate the various impacts of standards, DOE must develop a base case forecast against which to compare forecasts for higher efficacy levels. The base case forecast is designed to depict what will happen to energy consumpt ion and energy costs over time if DOE does not adopt amended energy conservation standards for the products covered by this rulemaking. In determining the base case forecast, DOE will consider historical shipments, the mix of efficacies

sold under current standards, and how that mix might change over time.

Item 32 DOE seeks informatio n on historical shipments of GS L s for each product class covered under this rulemaking, as well as industry

- trend data regarding relative growth in each product class.

10.2 Impacts of Standards on Shipments

For each product class, DOE plans to forecast shipment s over the 30

- year analysis period

for each of the potential standards analyzed. These standards case forecasts w ould be used to evaluate the impacts of standards on shipments. Standards case forecasts are derived using the

same data

- sets as base case forecasts; however, because the standards case forecasts take into account the increase in purchase price and the decrease in operating costs caused by new or amended standards, for ecasted shipments could deviate from the base case

.

Programs such as c onsumer rebate s that encourage the purchase of more

- efficient products and manufacturer tax credits that encourage the production of more

- efficient products

also affect standards case f orecasts. When such programs exist at the federal level , DOE considers their impact on the forecast of both standards case and base case shipments.

Item 33 DOE requests input on the potential impact of new energy conservati on standards on shipments of GS

L s . DOE also requests input on any other federal programs that currently exist to promote the adoption of more

- efficient lamps.

11. NATIONAL IMPACT ANAL YSIS

The NIA provides DOE’s assessment of the aggregate impacts of potential efficiency

standards at the national level. Measures of impact that DOE will report include future NES from CSLs ( i.e. , the cumulative incremental primary energy savings from an increased energy conservation standard relative to a base case that assumes no change in the energy conser vation national standard over a specific forecast period) and the NPV for consumers in the aggregate from CSLs ( i.e. , the cumulative incremental LCC from an increased energy conservation standard relative to the base case over a specific forecast period).30

11.1 Calculation of National Energy Savings

DOE intends to calculate national energy consumption for each year beginning with the expected compliance date of the standards. DOE would calculate national energy consumption

for the base case and each standard level analyzed. DOE plans to perform this calculation through the use of a spreadsheet model that effectively accounts for the stock of products affected by standards. 16 The energy savings are measured over the lifetime of products purchased

in the 30

- year projection period. 17

DOE has historically presented NES in terms of primary energy savings. On August 18, 2011, DOE announced its intention to use full

- fuel

- cycle (FFC) measures of energy use and greenhouse gas and other emissions in the national impact analyses and emissions analyses included in future energy conservation standards rulemakings. (76 FR 51282) While DOE stated in that notice that it intended to use the Greenhouse Gases, Regulated Emissions, and Energy Use in Transportation (GREET) model to conduct the analysis, it also said it would review alternative methods, including the use of the National Energy Modeling System (NEMS). After evaluating both models and the approaches discussed in the August 18, 2011 notice, DOE has

determined NEMS is a more appropriate tool for this analysis. 77 FR 49701 (August 17, 2012). Therefore, DOE intends to use NEMS to conduct FFC analyses.

Item 34 DOE welcomes comments on the NES spreadsheet models it plans to use for estimating national impacts of amended energy con servation standards for GSL s . DOE also welcomes comments on the inputs to the models and the sources used for determining the inputs.

11.2 Net Present Value

DOE calculates the national NPV of the standards in conjunction with the NES. It calculates annual energy expenditures from annual energy consumption by incorporating forecasted energy prices, using the shipment forecasts described in the shipments analysi s and electricity savings forecasts. DOE calculates annual product expenditures by multiplying the price per unit by the forecasted shipments. The difference between a base case and a standards case scenario gives the national energy bill savings and incre ased product expenditures in dollars. The difference each year between energy bill savings and increased product expenditures is the net savings (if positive) or net cost (if negative). DOE discounts these annual values to the present time and sums them to give an NPV. Since the national cost of capital may differ from the consumer cost of capital, the discount rate used in the NIA can be different from the rate used

in the LCC. In accordance with U.S. Office of Management and Budget ( OMB ) guidance, DOE

wil l conduct two NPV calculations, one using a real discount rate of 3 percent and another using

16 Several examples of NES spreadsheet models from previous rulemakings can be found on DOE’s website at: www.eere.energy.gov/buildings/appliance_standards/.

17 In the past, DOE presented energy savings results for only the 30

- year period that begins in the year of compliance. In the calculation of economic impacts, however, DOE considered operat ing cost savings measured over the entire lifetime of products purchased in the 30

- year period. DOE has chosen to modify its presentation of national energy savings to be consistent with the approach used for its national economic analysis31

a real discount rate of 7 percent. 18 Based on consideration of the comments received for the preliminary analysis, DOE will make any necessary changes to the analy sis and the CSLs.

Item 35 DOE welcomes comments on the inputs and methodology to calculate NES and NPV.

12. LIFE

- CYCLE COST SUBGROUP ANALYSIS

The LCC (consumer) subgroup analysis evaluates economic impacts on selected groups of consumers who might be adversely affected by a change in the national energy conservation standards for the considered products. DOE evaluates impacts on particular subgroups of consumers primarily by analyzing the LCC impacts and PBP for those particular consumers. In comparing potential impacts on the different consumer subgroups, DOE will evaluate variations in energy prices, energy use, and installation costs that might affect the impacts of a standard on the consumer subgroups. DOE seeks input regarding which consumer subgroups it sho uld consider in this rulemaking. Examples of potential consumer subgroups include low

- income consumers and institutions serving low

- income consumers

.

Item 36 DOE seeks input regarding which consumer subgroups it should consider in this rulemaking.

13. MANUFACTURER IMPACT ANALYSIS

The manufacturer impact analysis will assess the potential impacts of energy

conservation standards on manufacturers of GSLs

. A wide range of quantitative and qualitative effects may occur following the adoption of standards that may require chang es to manufacturing practices. DOE will identify these potential effects through interviews with manufacturers and other experts.

For the NOPR, DOE will conduct an industry

- wide cash

- flow analysis using the Government Regulatory Imp act Model (GRIM), identify and analyze subgroups of manufacturers whose businesses vary significantly from the industry as a whole, perform a competitive impacts assessment, and review the cumulative regulatory burden for the industry.

13.1 Sources of Informa tion

Many of the analyses described earlier provide important information that DOE uses as inputs for the MIA. Such information includes financial parameters developed in the market assessment (section 4.1 ), cost data developed in the product price determination (section 8 ), a nd shipments projections (section 10 ). DOE supplements this data with information gathered durin g manufacturer interviews. The interview process will play a key role in the MIA, as it provides an opportunity for interested parties to express their views on important issues.

DOE will conduct detailed interviews with manufacturers to gain insight into the range of potential impacts of standards. During the interviews, DOE will solicit information on the

18 OMB, Circular A

- 4: Regulatory Analysis (Sept. 17, 2003).32

possible impacts of standards o n manufacturing costs, product prices, sales, direct employment, capital assets, and industry competitiveness. Both quali tative and quantitative information are

valuable. DOE will schedule interviews well in advance to provide every opportunity for key

individuals to be available. Although a written response to the questionnaire is acceptable, DOE prefers an interactive inte rview process because it helps clarify responses and provides the opportunity for additional issues to be identified.

DOE will ask that interview participants identify all confidential information provided,

both in writi ng and orally. While it will conside r information gathered, as appropriate, in its

decision

- making process, DOE will protect confidential information from disclosure consistent with applicable law.

DOE will collate the information from interviews and prepare a summary of the major

issues an d outcomes. This summary will become part of the TSD produced for this rulemaking.

13.2 Industry Cash Flow Analysis

The industry cash flow analysis relies primarily on the GRIM. DOE uses the GRIM to analyze the financial impacts of more

- stringent energy conse rvation standards on the industry that manufactures the products covered by the standard.

The GRIM analysis uses a number of factors

— annual expected revenues; costs of goods sold; selling, general, and administrative costs; taxes; and capital expenditures

— to arrive at a series of annual cash flows beginning from the announcement of the standard and continuing through the analysis period. DOE compares the results against base

- case projections that involve no amended standards. The financial impa ct of amended standards is then the difference between the two sets of discounted annual cash flows. Other performance metrics, such as return on invested capital, also are available from the GRIM.

DOE will gather inputs needed for the GRIM from two primar y sources: (1) the analyses conducted to this point; and (2) interviews with manufacturers and other stakeholders. Information gathered from previous analyses will include financial parameters, manufacturing costs, price projections, and shipments projecti ons. Interviews with manufacturers and other stakeholders will supplement this information.

13.3 Manufacturer Subgroup Analysis

Average industry cost values may not reveal differential impacts among GSL manufacturer subgroups. Smaller manufacturers, niche players, and manufacturers exhibiting a cost structure that differs significantly from the industry average may be affected differently by

amended standards. Ideally, DOE would consider the impact on every firm individually. In highly concentrated industri es, this may be possible. However, for industries that have numerous participants, DOE will use the results of the market and technology assessment to group manufacturers into subgroups, as appropriate. For GSLs , DOE is interested in feedback about potenti al subgroups, including small businesses. DOE will conduct a Regulatory Flexibility Act analysis to determine the impacts of any amended standards on small businesses consistent with the Regulatory Flexibility Act.33

Item 37 DOE seeks comments on the subgroups of the GSL manufacturers that it should consider in a manufacturer subgroup analysis.

Item 38 DOE seeks comment on small businesses that could be impacted by energy conservation standards for GSLs, and what those impacts might entail.

14. UTILITY IMPACT ANALY SIS

To estimate the effects of energy conser vation standards for covered GS L s on the electric utility industry, DOE plans to use a variant of EIA’s NEMS that is tailored to DOE’s Building Technologies Program (NEMS

- BT). The utility impact analysis is a compari son between the

NEMS

- BT model results for the base case (the Annual Energy Outlook [ AEO ] reference case from the latest year available ) and standards cases. The utility impact analysis reports the changes in installed electric capacity and generation that result for each standard level by plant type. DOE will model the impacts from energy conservation standards using NEMS

- BT to
generate standards case forecasts. 19

Item 39 DOE welcomes comments on the approach it is considering to ass ess the impacts of potential standards under this rulemaking on electric utilities

.

15. EMPLOYMENT IMPACT AN ALYSIS

The promulgation of energy conservation standards can affect employment both directly and indirectly. Direct employment impacts are changes in the number of employees at the plants that produce the covered products. DOE will evaluate direct employment impacts through the

use of the GRIM in the MIA (see section 13 for more information )

.

Indirect employment impacts may result from expenditures shifting between goods (the substitution effect) and changes in income and overall expenditure levels (the income effect) that

occur due to the standards. The short

- term (5

- year) combined direct and indirect employment impacts will be investigated in the employment

- impact analysis using Pacific Northwest National Laboratory’s Impact of Sector Energy Technologies (ImSET) model. The ImSET model was developed for DOE’s Office of Planning, Budget, and Ana lysis, and estimates the employment and income effects of energy

- saving technologies in buildings, industry, and transportation. 20 In comparison with simple economic multiplier approaches, ImSET allows for more complete and automated analysis of the economi c impacts of energy conservation investments. DOE believes that the complexity of potential adjustments in the U.S. economy largely negates the value of long

- term projections of indirect employment impacts.

19 Several descriptions of NEMS

- BT models from previous rulemakings, including general service fluorescent lamps and incandescent reflector lamps, can be found on DOE’s website at: www.eere.energy.gov/buildings/appliance_standards/residential/pdfs/ch_14_lamps_standards_final_tsd .pdf

. 20 Roop, J. M., M. J. Scott, and R. W. Schultz, ImSET 3.1: Impact of Sector Energy Technologies (PNNL

- 18412 Pacific Northwest National Laboratory) (2008). Available at www.pnl.gov/main/publications/external/technical_reports/PNNL

- 18412.pdf.34

Item 40 DOE welcomes comments on the approach it is c onsidering to assess employment impacts as a result of energy conservation standards.

16. EMISSIONS ANALYSIS

In the emissions analysis, DOE will estimate the reduction in power sector emissions of carbon dioxide (CO 2 ), nitrogen oxides (NO X ), sulfur dioxide (SO 2 ) and mercury (Hg) from potential energy conservation standards for the considered products. In addition, DOE will estimate emissions impacts in production activities (extracting, processing, and transporting fuels) that provide the energy inputs to power plants. These are referred to as “upstream” emissions. Together, these emissions account for the FFC. In accordance with DOE’s FFC Statement of Policy (76 FR 51282 (Aug. 18, 2011)), the FFC analysis includes impacts on

emissions of methane and nitrous oxid e, both of which are recognized as greenhouse gases.

DOE conducts the emissions analysis using emissions factors derived from data in the

latest version of EIA’s AEO , supplemented by data from other sources. EIA prepares the AEO using NEMS. Each annual version of NEMS incorporates the projected impacts of existing air quality regulations on emissions. The text below refers to AEO 2013, which generally represents current legislation and environmental regulations, including recent government actions, for

w hich implementing regulations were available as of December 31, 2012. DOE will consider using the most recent version of AEO at the time of the analysis.

SO 2 emissions from affected electric generating units (EGUs) are subject to nationwide and regional em issions cap and trading programs. Title IV of the Clean Air Act sets an annual emissions cap on SO 2 for affected EGUs in the 48 contiguous states and the District of Columbia (D.C.). SO 2 emissions from 28 eastern states and D.C. were also limited under the Clean Air Interstate Rule (CAIR), which created an allowance

- based trading program that operates along

with the Title IV program in those States and D.C. 70 FR 25162 (May 12, 2005). CAIR was remanded to EPA by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit (D.C. Circuit), but it remained in effect. See North Carolina v. EPA , 550 F.3d 1176 (D.C. Cir. 2008);

North Carolina v. EPA , 531 F.3d 896 (D.C. Cir. 2008). On July 6, 2011 EPA issued a replacement for CAIR, the Cross

- State Air Pollution R ule (CSAPR). 76 FR 48208 (August 8, 2011). On August 21, 2012, the D.C. Circuit issued a decision to vacate CSAPR. See EME Homer City Generation, LP v. EPA , 696 F.3d 7, 38 (D.C. Cir. 2012). The court ordered EPA to continue administering CAIR. AEO 2013 ass umes that CAIR remains a binding regulation through 2040.

The attainment of emissions caps is typically flexible among EGUs and is enforced through the use of emissions allowances and tradable permits. Under existing EPA regulations, any excess SO 2 emissi ons allowances resulting from the lower electricity demand caused by the adoption of an efficiency standard could be used to permit offsetting increases in SO 2 emissions by any regulated EGU. In past rulemakings, DOE recognized that there was uncertainty a bout the effects of efficiency standards on SO 2 emissions covered by the existing cap

- and

- trade system, but it concluded that no reductions in power sector emissions would occur for SO 2 as a result of standards.35

Beginning in 2015, however, SO 2 emissions w ill fall as a result of the Mercury and Air Toxics Standards (MATS) for power plants, which were announced by EPA on December 21,

2011. 77 FR 9304 (Feb. 16, 2012). In the final MATS rule, EPA established a standard for HCl as a surrogate for acid gas hazar dous air pollutants (HAP), and also established a standard for

SO 2 (a non

- HAP acid gas) as an alternative equivalent surrogate standard for acid gas HAP. The

same controls are used to reduce HAP and non

- HAP acid gas; thus, SO 2 emissions will be

reduced as a result of the control technologies installed on coal

- fired power plants to comply with the MATS requirements for acid gas. AEO 2013 assumes that, in order to continue operating, coal plants must have either flue gas desulfurization or dry sorbent injecti on systems installed by 2015. Both technologies, which are used to reduce acid gas emissions, also reduce

SO 2 emissions. Under the MATS, NEMS shows a reduction in SO 2 emissions when electricity demand decreases ( e.g. , as a result of energy efficiency stand ards). Emissions will be far below the cap that would be established by CAIR , so it is unlikely that excess SO 2 emissions allowances resulting from the lower electricity demand would be needed or used to permit offsetting increases in SO 2 emissions by any regulated EGU. Therefore, DOE believes that efficiency standards will reduce SO 2 emissions in 2015 and beyond.

CAIR established a cap on NO X emissions in eastern States and the District of Columbia. Energy conservation standards are expected to have little or no physical effect on these emissions in those States covered by CAIR because excess NO

x emissions allowances resulting from the

lower e lectricity demand could be used to permit offsetting increases in NO

x emissions. However, standards would be expected to reduce NO

x emissions in the States not affected by the caps, so DOE estimates NO X emissions reductions from potential standards in the States where emissions are not capped.

The MATS limit mercury emissions from power plants, but they do not include emissions caps and, as such, DOE’s energy conservation standards would likely reduce Hg emissions. DOE will estimate mercury emissions redu ction using emissions factors based on AEO 2013 , which incorporates the MATS.

Power plants may emit particulates from the smoke stack, which are known as direct particulate matter (PM) emissions. NEMS does not account for direct PM emissions from power plants. DOE is investigating the possibility of using other methods to estimate reduction in PM emissions due to standards. The great majority of ambient PM associated with power plants is in the form of secondary sulfates and nitrates, which are produced at a significant distance from power plants by complex atmospheric chemical reactions that often involve the gaseous emissions of power plants, mainly SO 2 and NO

x . The monetary benefits that DOE estimates for

reductions in SO 2 and NO

x emissions resulting f rom standards are in fact primarily related to the

health benefits of reduced ambient PM.

Item 41 DOE seeks input on the approach it plans to use to conduct the emissions analysis for the products covered by this rulemaking.36

17. MONETIZING CARBON DIOXIDE AND O TH ER E MISSIONS REDUCTIONS

DOE plans to consider the estimated monetary benefits likely to result from the reduced

emissions of CO 2 and NO X that are expected to result from each of the standard levels

considered.

To estimate the monetary value of benefits resulting from reduced emissions of CO 2 , DOE plans to use the most current Social Cost of Carbon (SCC) values developed and/or agreed to by an interagency process. The SCC is intended to be a monetary measure of the incremental damage resulting fr om greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, including, but not limited to, net agricultural productivity loss, human health effects, property damage from sea level rise, and changes in ecosystem services. Any effort to quantify and to monetize the harms associated with climate change will raise serious questions of science, economics, and ethics. But with full regard for the limits of both quantification and monetization, the SCC can be used to provide

estimates of the social benefits of reductions in GHG emissions.

The Interagency Working Group on Social Cost of Carbon released an update of its previous report in 2013. 21 The most recent estimates of the SCC in 2015, expressed in 2012$, are $12.9, $40.8, $62.2, and $117 per metric ton of CO 2 avoided. For emissions reductions that occur in later years, these values grow in real terms over time. Additionally, the interagency group determined that a range of values from 7 percent to 23 percent should be used to adjust the global SCC to calculate domestic effects, altho ugh DOE will give preference to consideration of the global benefits of reducing CO 2 emissions.

DOE multiplies the CO 2 emissions reduction estimated for each year by the SCC value for that year in each of the four cases. To calculate a present value of the stream of monetary values, DOE discounts the values in each of the four cases using the discount rates that had been

used to obtain the SCC values in each case.

DOE recognizes that scientific and economic knowledge continues to evolve rapidly as to

the contribution of CO 2 and other GHG to changes in the future global climate and the potential resulting damages to the w orld economy. Thus, these values are subject to change.

DOE also estimates the potential monetary benefit of reduced NO X emissions resulting from the standard levels it considers. Estimates of monetary value for reducing NOx from stationary sources rang e from $468 to $4,809 per ton in 2012$. 22 In accordance with OMB guidance, 23 DOE calculates monetary benefits using a medium value for NO X emissions of $2,639 per short ton (in 2012$), and real discount rates of 3 percent and 7 percent

.

21 Technical Update of the Social Cost of Carbon for Regulatory Impact Anal ysis Under Executive Ord er 12866

. Interagency Working Group on Social Cost of Carbon, United States Government , May 2013. http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/omb/inforeg/social_cost_of_carbon_for_ria_2013_update.pdf

22 U.S. Office of Management and Budget , Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, 2006 Report to Congress on the Costs and Benefits of Federal Regul ations and Unfunded Mandates on State, Local, and Tribal Entities

, Washington, DC

. 23 OMB, Circular A

- 4: Regulatory Analysis, 2003 (Posted Sept. 17, 2003).37

DOE is evaluating appropriate valuation of avoided SO 2 and Hg emissions. Whether monetization of reduced Hg emissions will occur in this rulemaking is yet to be determined

.

Item 42 DOE requests comments on the approach it plans to use for estimating monetary benefits associated with emissions reductions.

18. REGULATORY IMPACT AN ALYSIS

Pursuant to section 6(a)(3) of Executive Order 12866, “Regulatory Planning and Review,” 58 FR 51735 (Oct. 4, 1993), if DOE determines that amended energy conservation

standards for GSLs co nstitute a significant regulatory action, during the NOPR stage of this rulemaking DOE will prepare and submit to OMB: (1) an assessment of the costs and benefits of the proposed regulation, and (2) if the proposed rule is also significant under section 3( f)(1) of the E.O. 12866, a Regulatory Impact Analysis (RIA) which is subject to review under the Executive Order by the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA) at the OMB. The RIA will address the potential for non

- regulatory approaches to supp lant or augment energy conservation standards to improve the energy efficiency or reduce the energy consumption of

GSLs covered under this rulemaking

.

DOE recognizes that voluntary or other non

- regulatory efforts by manufacturers, utilities,

and other int erested parties can result in substantial improvements to energy efficiency or reductions in energy consumption. DOE will base its assessment on the actual impacts of any such initiatives to date, but also will consider information presented regarding the impacts that any existing initiative might have in the future.

Item 43 DOE welcomes comments on the methodology it is considering for the regulatory impact analysis.38

APPENDIX A

– LIST OF ITEMS FOR CO MMENT

This appendix lists all the items for comment contained in this Framework Document and the page numbers on which those items can be found.

Item 1 DOE welcomes comment regarding the adoption of test procedures for additional lamp types, including pin base CFLs, hybrid lamps, and self

- ballasted mercury vapor lamps, covered

under this rulemaki ng.

................................ ................................ ................................ .................... 5 Item 2 DOE welcomes comment on definitions for compact fluorescent lamp and pin base compact fluorescent lamp.

................................ ................................ ................................ ............ 13 Item 3 DOE welcomes comment on a definition for general service LED lamp.

........................ 14 Item 4 DOE welcomes comment on the commercial availability of OLED lamps that can serve in general lighting applications, and DOE’s consideration to exclude OLED lamps in this rulemaking.

................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ ... 14 Item 5 DOE welcomes comment on a definition for hybrid lamp.

................................ ............... 15

Item 6 DOE welcomes comment on additional lamp types that should be considered in the scope of this rulemaking.

................................ ................................ ................................ ........................ 15

Item 7 DOE welcomes comment on any lamps that should not be considered within the scope of this rulemaking. If such a lamp is identified, DOE requests specific information on why the lamp should not be considered and performance characteristics of the lamp.

................................ ....... 15

Item 8 DOE welcomes information on shipments, product

- feature and efficiency trends, distribution channels and estimates of market shares for the lamps considered in this rulemaking. For the data to be used to conduct energy savings calculations, please provide appro priate groupings (e.g., by technology, wattage, and/or other relevant performance characteristics).

.... 16

Item 9 DOE welcomes comment on the product class divisions it is considering for general service lamps. In particular, DOE welcomes comment on the impact that ballast location and dimmability have on the efficacy of compact fluorescent lamps and LED lamps. DOE also

welcomes comment on the utility offered by self

- ballasted, covered, and dimmable lamps.

...... 17 Item 10 DOE welcomes comment on any other class

- setting factors that should be considered in the analysis.

................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ ... 17

Item 11 DOE welcomes comment on a definition for the term “covered” that is applicable across technologies.

................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ . 17

Item 12 DOE welcomes comments on the preliminary technology options it is considering for this rule and whether there are additional technology options that should be considered. DOE also requests information on the feasibility, performance, impacts, and cost of the technology options.

................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ .......... 20 Item 13 DOE welcomes comments on the applicability of the four screening criteria to the technology options listed in section 4.3.

................................ ................................ ....................... 20

Item 14 DOE welcomes comments on how the four screening criteria might apply to any additional technology option(s) than an interested party recommends to DOE.

.......................... 20 Item 15 DOE welcomes comments on the overall methodology for the engineering analysis.

... 21

Item 16 DOE welcomes comments on the identification and selection of product classes with the highest shipment volume to be analyzed as representat ive for this rulemaking. In particular, DOE requests shipment information for lamps included in the scope of this rulemaking broken down by ballast location, cover, dimmability, and any other features deemed relevant by interested parties.

................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ ........... 2239

Item 17 DOE welcomes comment on whether the characteristics of products with the highest shipment volume change depending on lamp t echnology.

................................ ........................... 22

Item 18 DOE welcomes comments on its proposed approach for selecting baseline lamps in this rulemaking.

................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ ... 23

Item 19 DOE welcomes comments on the methodology it is considering to select higher

- efficacy lamp designs.

................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ . 24 Item 20 DOE welcomes comments on its proposed methodology of establishing efficacy levels. In particular, DOE requests comments on the appropriateness of usi ng an equation

- based approach to reflect the relationship between efficacy and wattage for all covered lamp technologies.

................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ . 24

Item 21 DOE welcomes comment on the use of compliance data and verification testing data when establishing efficacy levels.

................................ ................................ ................................ . 24

Ite m 22 DOE welcomes comments on the methodology to scale to products not directly analyzed.

................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ ....... 25

Item 23 DOE welcomes comments on prop rietary designs it should be aware of for the GSLs that are the subject of this rulemaking.

................................ ................................ ................................ 25

Item 24 DOE welcomes comments on re gulatory burdens or changes that should be considered in the engineering analysis.

................................ ................................ ................................ ........... 25

Item 25 DOE welcomes comments on other issu es that could affect the engineering analysis.

.. 25

Item 26 DOE welcomes comments on the methodology it is considering to determine energy use. In particular, DOE requests comments on its approach to calculate operating hours for the

c overed lamps.

................................ ................................ ................................ .............................. 26 Item 27 DOE welcomes comments on the methodology it is considering for lamp prices for this rulemaking.

................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ ... 27 Item 28 DOE welcomes comment on the distribution channels utilized for the lamp technologies covered in this rulemaking and if the chan nels vary by technology. In particular, DOE requests comment on the appropriateness of the potential distribution channels identified, specifically State procurement contracts, large electrical supply distributors, home improvement/hardware stores, and int ernet retailers.

................................ ................................ ................................ ......... 27 Item 29 DOE welcomes comment on the availability of blue books or price schedules for the lamp technologies c overed in this rulemaking, particularly LED lamps.

................................ ..... 27 Item 30 DOE also welcomes comment on price forecasting methodologies for GSLs.

............... 27

Item 31 DOE welcomes comments on the approach it is considering to conduct the LCC and PBP analyses.

................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ 28 Item 32 DOE seeks information on historical shipments of GSLs for each product class covered under this rulemaking, as well as industry

- trend d ata regarding relative growth in each product

class.

................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ .............. 29

Item 33 DOE requests input on the potential impact of new energy conservation standards on shipments of GSLs. DOE also requests input on any other federal programs that currently exist to promote the adoption of more

- efficient lamps.

................................ ................................ ............. 29 Item 34 DOE welcomes comments on the NES spreadsheet models it plans to use for estimating national impacts of amended energy conservation standards for GS Ls. DOE also welcomes comments on the inputs to the models and the sources used for determining the inputs.

............ 30 Item 35 DOE welcomes comments on the inputs and methodology to calculate NES and NPV. 31

Item 36 DOE seeks input regarding which consumer subgroups it should consider in this rulemaking.

................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ ... 3140

Item 37 DOE seeks comments on the subgroups of the GSL manufacturers that it should consider in a manufacturer subgroup analysis.

................................ ................................ ............. 33

Item 38 DOE seeks comment on small businesses that could be impacted by energy conservation standards for GSLs, and what those impacts might entail.

................................ ........................... 33

Item 39 DOE welcomes comments on the approach it is considering to assess the impacts of potential standards under this rulemaking on electric utilities.

................................ ..................... 33

Item 40 DOE welcomes comments on the approach it is considering to assess employment impacts as a result of energy conservation standards.

................................ ................................ .. 34 Item 41 DOE seeks input on the approach it plans to use to conduct the emissions analysis for the products covered by this rulemaking.

................................ ................................ ........................... 35 Item 42 DOE requests comments on the approach it plans to use for estimating monetary benefits

associated with emissions reductions.

................................ ................................ ........................... 37

Item 43 DOE welcomes comments on the methodology it is considering for the regulatory impact analysis.

................................ ................................ ................................ ............................. 37