# Report on Data Collection and

Estimated Future Unit Sales of Five Lamp Types

Building Technologies Program Office of Energy Efficien cy and Renewable Energy U.S. Department of Energy

December 18, 2008TABLE OF CONTENTS

I. Introduction

.............................................................................................................................. ... 2 II. Definitions and Forecast Methodology ...................................................................................... 4 A. Definitions

.............................................................................................................................. 4 1. Rough Service Lamps ......................................................................................................... 4 2. Vibration Service Lamps .................................................................................................... 5 3. Three-Way Incandescent Lamps ......................................................................................... 6 4. 2,601–3,300 Lumen General Service Incandescent Lamps ................................................ 6 5. Shatter-Resistant Lamps ..................................................................................................... 7 B. Forecast Methodology ............................................................................................................ 8 III. Unit Sales Forecast Estimates ................................................................................................. 10 A. Rough Service Lamps .......................................................................................................... 10 B. Vibration Service Lamps ...................................................................................................... 11 C. Three-Way Incandescent Lamps .......................................................................................... 13 D. 2,601–3,300 Lumen General Service Incandescent Lamps ................................................. 15 E. Shatter-Resistant Lamps ....................................................................................................... 17 IV. Proceedings If the Index Is Exceeded ..................................................................................... 20 A. Rough Service Lamps .......................................................................................................... 20 B. Vibration Service Lamps ...................................................................................................... 21 C. Three-Way Incandescent Lamps .......................................................................................... 21 D. 2,601–3,300 Lumen General Service Incandescent Lamps ................................................. 22 E. Shatter-Resistant Lamps ....................................................................................................... 22 F. Potential Termination of Data Collection ............................................................................. 23 G. Review Under the Information Quality Bulletin for Peer Review ....................................... 23

LIST OF TABLES

Table III.1 Rough Service Lamp Shipme nts and Benchmark Unit Sales Estimate ...................... 11 Table III.2 Vibration Service Lamp Shipments and Unit Sales Estimate ..................................... 13 Table III.3 Three-Way Incandescent Lamp Sh ipments and Benchmark Unit Sales Estimate ..... 15 Table III.4 2,601

− 3,300 Lumen General Service Incandescent Lamps Shipments and Benchmark Unit Sales Estimate ....................................................................................................................... 17 Table III.5 Shatter-Resistant Lamp Ship ments and Benchmark Unit Sales Estimate .................. 19

1I. Introduction The Energy Independence and Security Ac t of 2007 (EISA 2007) (Pub. L. 110-140) was enacted on December 19, 2007. Among the requirements of subtitle B of title III of EISA 2007 were provisions directing the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) to collect, analyze and monitor unit sales of five lamp types ( i.e. , rough service lamps, vibr ation service lamps, 3-way incandescent lamps, 2,601–3,300 lumen general service incandescent lamps, a nd shatter resistant lamps). Specifically, section 321(a)(3)(B) of EISA 2007 amends section 325(l) of the Energy Policy and Conservation Act (EPCA) by adding paragraph (4)(B) which generally directs DOE

in consultation with the National Electrical Ma nufacturers Association (NEMA) to (1) collect unit sales data for each of the five lamp types an d (2) construct a spreadsheet model for each of the five lamp types based on coincident economic indicators that closel y match the historical annual growth rates of each lamp type to provide a neutral benchmark estimate of future unit sales. (42 U.S.C. 6295(l)(4)(B)) Section 321(a) (3)(B) of EISA 2007 also amends section 325(l) of EPCA by adding paragraph (4)(C). This para graph, in part, generally directs DOE, to collect unit sales data for calendar year s 2010 through 2025 in consultation with NEMA for each of the five lamp types. DOE must then compare the actu al lamp sales in that year with the benchmark estimate to determine if the unit sales projecti on has been exceeded. (42 U.S.C. 6295(l)(4)(C)) In section III of this report, DOE presents th e data collected in consultation with NEMA, the model DOE constructed for each lamp type, and the benchmark unit sales estimate for 2010 through 2025.

2EISA 2007 also amends section 325(l) of EPCA by adding paragr aphs (4)(D) through (4)(H) which state that if DOE finds that the un it sales for a given lamp in any year between 2010 and 2025 exceed the benchmark estimate of unit sales by at least 100 percent ( i.e. , more than double the anticipated sales), then DOE mu st take regulatory action. (42 U.S.C. 6295(l)(4)(D) – (H)) For 2,601–3,300 lumen general service incandescent lamps, DOE must adopt a prescribed regulatory standard and for th e other four types of lamp, the statute requires

DOE to initiate an accelerated rulemaking. If the Secretary fa ils to complete the accelerated rulemakings within one year of the end of the previous calendar year, the statute provides a “backstop requirement” for each lamp type. Secti on IV of this report di scusses the regulatory procedure that DOE would follow if the actual unit sales for a lamp type in any one year exceed

the benchmark unit sales estim ate by at leas t 100 percent.

This report, the accompanying Notice of Data Availability (NODA), and spreadsheet models that generate the benc hmark unit sales estimate for each of the five lamp types as fulfilling the requirements of EPCA section 325(l)(4)(B). In this analysis, DOE uses (and intends to continue to use) manufactur er shipments as a surrogate fo r unit sales. This assumption presumes that retailer inventorie s remain constant from year to year. DOE believes this is a reasonable assumption because the markets for th ese five lamp types have existed for many years, enabling manufacturers and re tailers to establish appropriate inventory levels that reflect market demand. Furthermore, in the long-run, un it sales could not increase in any one year without manufacturer shipments incr easing either that year or the following one. In either case, increasing unit sales must eventually resu lt in increasing ma nufacturer shipments

3II. Definitions and Forecast Methodology

A. Definitions 1. Rough Service Lamps Section 321(a)(1)(B) of EISA 2007 amended section 321(30) of EPCA by adding the definition of a rough service lamp. The statutory definition reads as follows: “The term ‘rough service lamp’ means a lamp that -- (i) has a mini mum of 5 supports with filament configurations that are C-7A, C-11, C-17, and C-22 as listed in Figure 6-12 of the 9th edition of the IESNA Lighting handbook, or similar configurations where lead wires are not c ounted as supports; and (ii) is designated and marketed specifically for ‘rough service’ applications, with - (I) the designation appearing on the lamp packaging; and (II) ,marketing materials that identify the lamp as being for rough service. ” (42 U.S.C. 6291(30)(X))

Rough service lamps must have a minimum of five filament support wires (not counting the two connecting leads at the beginning and end of the filament), and must be designated and marketed for “rough service” applications. These la mps are typically used in applications where an incandescent lamp is subject to mechanical shock or vibrati on while it is operating. Standard incandescent lamps have only two support wires (which also serve as conductors), one at each end of the filament coil. When operating ( i.e. , when the tungsten filament is glowing so hot that it emits light), the filament is brittle, and rough service applications c ould cause it to break prematurely. To address this problem, lamp manufacturers develope d lamp designs that incorporate additional support wires along the length of the filament to ensure that it has support not just at each end, but at se veral other points. The additiona l support protects the filament during operation and enables long er operating life for incandescent lamps in rough service

4applications. Typical applications for these lamps might include commercial hallways and stairwells, gyms, storage areas, and security areas.

2. Vibration Service Lamps Section 321(a)(1)(B) of EISA 2007 amended section 321(30) of EPCA by adding the definition of a vibration service lamp. The stat utory definition reads as follows: “The term vibration service lamp means a lamp that -- (i) Has filament confi gurations that are C-5, C-7A, or C-9, as listed in Figure 6-12 of the 9th Edit ion of the IESNA Lighting Handbook or similar configurations; (ii) has a maximum wattage of 60 watts; (iii) is sold at retail in packages of 2 lamps or less; and (iv) is desi gnated and marketed specifically fo r vibration service or vibrationresistant applications, with -- (I) The designati on appearing on the lamp packaging; and (II) marketing materials that identify the lamp as being vibration service only.” (42 U.S.C. 6291(30)(AA))

The statute mentions three examples of filame nt configurations for vibration service lamps in Figure 6-12 of the IESNA Lighting Handbook , one of which ( i.e. , C-7A) is also listed in the definition of rough service lamps. The definition of vibration service lamps requires that they have a maximum wattage of 60 watts and be sold at a retail level in packages of two lamps or less. Similar to rough service lamps, vibrati on service lamps also must be designated and

marketed for vibration service or vibration-resistant applications . As the name suggests, these lamps are generally used in applications where an incandescent lamp is subject to a continuous low level of vibration, such as in a ceiling fan light kit. Standard incandescent lamps without additional filament support wires may not have a full rated life because the filament wire is brittle and subject to breakage at operating temperature.

53. Three-Way Incandescent Lamps Section 321(a)(1)(B) of EISA 2007 amended section 321(30) of EPCA by adding the definition of a 3-way incandescent lamp. The statut ory definition reads as follows: “The term 3- way incandescent lamp includes an incandescent la mp that -- (i) employs 2 filaments, operated separately and in combination, to provide 3 light levels; and (ii) is designated on the lamp packaging and marketing materials as bei ng a 3-way incandescent lamp.” (42 U.S.C. 6291(30)(Y))

Three-way lamps are commonly found in wa ttages such as 50, 100, and 150 watts or 30, 70, and 100 watts. These lamps use two filaments ( e.g. , a 30-watt and a 70-watt filament) and can be operated separately to produce 305 lumens or 995 lumens, respectively, or together to produce 1,300 lumens. When used in 3-way sockets, these lamps allow users to control the light level. Three-way incandescent lamps are typically used in residential multi-purpose areas, where consumers may adjust the light level to be appropriate for the task they are performing.

4. 2,601–3,300 Lumen General Service Incandescent Lamps The statute does not provide a defi nition of 2,601–3,300 Lumen General Service Incandescent Lamps, however DOE is interpreting this term to be a general serv ice incandescent lamp 1 that emits between 2,601 and 3,300 lumens. In this lumen range, the wattages of,general service incandescent lamp covered are between 140 and 170 watts. Within that range, the only commonly made lamp that meets other general serv ice incandescent lamp cr iteria is rated at 150

1 General service incandescent lamp is defined as a standard incandescent or halogen type lamp that — (I) is intended for general service applications; (II) has a medium screw base; (III) has a lumen range of not less than 310 lumens and not more than 2,600 lumens; and (IV) is capabl e of being operated at a voltage range at least partially within 110 and 130 volts. (42 U.S.C. 6291(30)(D))

6watts. Should other rated wattages enter the market that fall within this lumen range, they will be immediately recognizable because as require d by the Energy Policy Act of 1992, all general service incandescent lamps must be labeled with lamp lumen output. 2

5. Shatter-Resistant Lamps Section 321(a)(1)(B) of EISA 2007 amended section 321(30) of EPCA by adding the definition of a shatter-resistant lamp, shatte r-proof lamp, and shatte r-protected lamp. The statutory definition reads as follo ws: “The terms ‘shatter-resista nt lamp,’ ‘shatter-proof lamp,’ and ‘shatter-protected lamp’ mean a lamp that -- (i ) has a coating or equiva lent technology that is compliant with NSF/ANSI 51 and is designed to c ontain the glass if the glass envelope of the lamp is broken; and (ii) is designated and ma rketed for the intended application, with (I) the designation on the lamp packaging; and (II) marketi ng materials that identify the lamp as being shatter-resistant, shatter-proof, or shatter-protected.” (42 U.S.C. 6291(30)(Z)) Although the definition provides three names co mmonly used to refer to these lamps, DOE simply calls them “shatter-resistant lamps.”

Shatter-resistant lamps incorporate a special co ating designed to prevent glass shards from being strewn if a lamp’s glass envelope breaks. Shatter-resistant lamps incorporate a coating compliant with industry standard NSF/ANSI 51 3 , and are labeled and marketed as shatterresistant, shatter-proof, or shatter-protected. The coatings prot ect the lamp from breakage due to heat and thermal shock that may occur from wa ter, sleet, snow, soldering, or welding.

2 The Federal Trade Commission issued the lamp labeling requirements in 1994 (see 16 CFR 305.15(a), (b) and (c)). 59 FR 25176 (May 13, 1994). The package must display the lamp’s light output (in lumens), energy use (in watts), and lamp life (in hours). 3 This standard is published by the National Sanitation Foundation and the American National Standards Institute. Titled “Food Equipment Materials,” NSF/ANSI 51 applies specifically to materials and coatings used in the manufacturing of equipment and objects des tined for contact with foodstuffs.

7B. Forecast Methodology The statute in part requires DOE to “constr uct a model for each type of lamp based on

coincident economic indicators that closely match the historical annua l growth rate of the type of lamp to provide a neutral comparison benchmark to model future unit sales after calendar year 2006.” (42 U.S.C. 6295(l)(4 )(B)(ii)) DOE interprets this requi rement to mean that the model should be projecting future unit sales based on hi storical shipments, and that DOE should be aware of any coincident economic indicators or influences that may affect sales.

DOE reviewed each of the five sets of shipme nt data that were collected in consultation with NEMA and applied two curve fits to gene rate unit sales estimates after calendar year 2006. One curve fit applies a linear regression to the hist orical data and extends that line into the future. The other curve fit applies an e xponential growth function to the shipment data and projects unit

sales into the future. For this ca lculation, linear regressi on treats the year as a dependent variable and shipments as the independent variable. The curve fit is modeled by minimizing the differences among the data points and the best curve-fit linear line us ing the least squares

function. 4 The exponential curve fit is also a regressi on function and uses the same least squares function to find the best fit. However, this techni que fits the data to an exponential curve rather than a linear line. For some data sets, an exponential curve provides a bett er characterization of the historical data, and therefore a better projection of the future data.

For 3-way incandescent lamps, 2,601-3,300 lume n general service incandescent lamps, and

4 The least squares function is a tool that DOE uses to minimize the sum of the squared residual differences between the actual historical data points and the modeled value ( i.e. , the linear curve fit). In minimizing this value, the resulting curve fit will represent the best fit possible to the data provided.

8shatter resistant lamps, DOE found that the linea r and exponential curve f its produced nearly the same estimates of unit sales ( i.e. , the difference between the two forecasted values was less than 1 or 2 percent). However, for rough service and vibration service lamps, the linear curve fit projects lamp unit sales will decline to zero for both lamp types by 2018. In contrast, the exponential curve fit projected a mo re gradual decline in unit sales, such that lamps will still be sold beyond 2018. DOE discusses this finding in more detail in section II I, where it examines each of the five lamp type models and the benchmark unit sales estimates.

9III. Unit Sales Forecast Estimates A. Rough Service Lamps In consultation with NEMA, DOE collected shipment data for r ough service lamps from 1990 through 2006. As stated previously, DOE uses shipment data as a surrogate for unit sales data in this analysis. The rough service lamp shipment data reflect a peak in 1990 at approximately 18 million units with a general tr end downward to approximately 8 million units in 2006. DOE applied two curve fits to the histori cal data, resulting in tw o different projections between 2010 and 2025. The linear regression forecast projected a constant slope steady decline in which unit sales of rough service lamps are estimated to end in 2018. The exponential curve fit also projects a decline in unit sales, but the forecast has a more asymptotic 5 shape as it reduces

unit sales between 2010 and 2025. Afte r considering the results of these two projections and the likelihood of a continuing need for rough service lamps in certain specialty applications, DOE

chose to base its future unit sales model on th e exponential curve fit. The exponential curve fit projects that rough servi ce lamp unit sales will decrease from approximately 7.6 million units in 2006 to approximately 3 million units in 2025, a re duction of 60 percent. DOE expects the unit sales of rough service lamps to continue to decline from 2010 through 2025, as they did between 1990 and 2006. DOE is not aware of any evidence or changes in market demand that would support a projection of all unit sa les of rough service lamps (and th ereby, all sock ets currently using these lamps) ending abruptly in 2018. Rather , DOE expects these app lications will still exist in 2018 and beyond, albeit in progressively smaller quantities.

Table III.1 presents the shipment data co llected in consultation with NEMA and the

5 In the benchmark unit sales estimate, the asymptotic curve trends toward zero between 2010 and 2025 but does not intersect with zero.

10benchmark unit sales estimate DOE prepared fr om those data for rough service lamps. The results presented in the column labeled “bench mark unit sales estimate” represent the unit sales projection for rough service lamps. The first year of unit sales reported for these lamps is 2010 because that year is the first one DOE is requ ired to compare against actual unit sales. (42 U.S.C. 6295(l)(4)(C)) The years 2007, 2008 and 2009 are not benchmark years under EPCA section 325(l)(4)(C)(i) and therefore are omitted from this table. However, shipment estimates for those years are available in DOE’s spreadsheet model for this lamp type.

Table III.1 Rough Service Lamp Shipments and Benchmark Unit Sales Estimate

Calendar Year NEMA Shipment Data Provided thousands Calendar Year Benchmark Unit Sales Estimate thousands 1990 18,251 2010 6,395 1991 15,920 2011 6,080 1992 15,860 2012 5,780 1993 15,289 2013 5,495 1994 16,296 2014 5,224 1995 15,400 2015 4,967 1996 12,090 2016 4,722 1997 10,995 2017 4,489 1998 9,315 2018 4,268 1999 9,869 2019 4,057 2000 11,034 2020 3,857 2001 13,522 2021 3,667 2002 9,379 2022 3,486 2003 9,019 2023 3,314 2004 8,818 2024 3,151 2005 8,211 2025 2,995 2006 7,661

B. Vibration Service Lamps In consultation with NEMA, DOE collected ship ment data for vibration service lamps from 1990 through 2006. As stated previously, DOE uses shipment data as a surrogate for unit sales

11data in this analysis. The vi bration service lamp shipment data reflect a peak in 1990 at approximately 9 million units with a general tren d downward to approximately 4 million units in 2006. DOE applied two curve fits to the historical data, resulti ng in two different projections between 2010 and 2025. The linear regression forecast projected a constant slope steady decline in which unit sales of vibration service lamp s are estimated to end in 2018. The exponential curve fit also projects a declin e in sales, but the forecast has a more asymptotic shape as it

reduces unit sales betwee n 2010 and 2025. After considering the results of these two projections and the likelihood of a continuing need for vi bration service lamps in certain specialty applications such as ceiling fa n light kits, DOE chose to base its future unit sales model on the exponential curve fit. The exponent ial curve fit projects that vibr ation service lamp unit sales will decrease from approximately 4 million units in 2006 to approximately 1.5 million units in

2025

⎯ a reduction of approximately 60 percent. DOE expects the uni t sales of vibration service lamps to decline between 2010 and 2025, as they did between 1990 and 2006. DOE is not aware of any evidence or changes in market demand that would support a projection of all unit sales of rough service lamps (and thereby, a ll sockets currently using thes e lamps) ending abruptly in 2018. Rather, DOE expects these applications will still exist in 2018 and beyond, albeit in progressively smaller quantities.

Table III.2 presents the shipment data co llected in consultation with NEMA and the benchmark unit sales estimate DOE prepared from those data for vibrat ion service lamps. The results presented in the column labeled “bench mark unit sales estimate” represent the unit sales projection for vibration service lamps. The first year of unit sales reported for these lamps is 2010 because that year is the first one DOE is re quired to compare against actual unit sales. (42

12U.S.C. 6295(l)(4)(C)) The years 2007, 2008 and 2009 are not benchmark years under EPCA section 325(l)(4)(C)(i) and therefore are omitted from this table. However, shipment estimates for those years are available in DOE’s spreadsheet model for this lamp type.

Table III.2 Vibration Service Lamp Shi pments and Unit Sales Estimate

Calendar Year NEMA Shipment Data Provided thousands Calendar Year Benchmark Unit Sales Estimate thousands 1990 9,533 2010 3,341 1991 8,315 2011 3,176 1992 8,283 2012 3,019 1993 7,986 2013 2,871 1994 8,512 2014 2,729 1995 8,044 2015 2,594 1996 6,314 2016 2,467 1997 5,743 2017 2,345 1998 4,865 2018 2,229 1999 5,154 2019 2,119 2000 5,763 2020 2,015 2001 7,063 2021 1,916 2002 4,899 2022 1,821 2003 4,711 2023 1,731 2004 4,606 2024 1,646 2005 4,289 2025 1,565 2006 4,002

C. Three-Way Incandescent Lamps In consultation with NEMA, DOE collected shipment data for 3- way incandescent lamps from 1990 through 2006. As stated previously, DOE us es the shipment data as a surrogate for unit sales data in this analysis. The 3-way incandescent lamp shipment data reflect a peak in 1997 at approximately 67 million units followed by a general trend downward to approximately 43 million units in 2006. DOE applied two curve fits to the historical data , resulting in similar projections between 2010 and 2025. Both projec tions indicate that unit sales will trend

13downward, at a gradual rate approaching 44 million units in 2025. The greatest difference between the linear regression cu rve fit and the expone ntial curve fit occurs in 2025, when the exponential curve fit projects approximately 0.5 million more unit sales. In that year, the

difference in unit sales between the two forecasts is less than 2 percent. Therefore, DOE would be satisfied that either spreadsheet model w ould generate a reasonable benchmark unit sales estimate, but is selecting the e xponential curve fit for consistenc y with the selection made for rough service and vibrat ion service lamps.

Table III.3 presents the shipment data co llected in consultation with NEMA and the benchmark unit sales estimate DOE prepared from those data for 3-way incandescent lamps. The results presented in the column labeled “bench mark unit sales estimate” represent the unit sales projection for 3-way incandescent lamps. The first year of unit sales reported for these lamps is 2010 because that year is the first one DOE is re quired to compare against actual unit sales. (42 U.S.C. 6295(l)(4)(C)) The years 2007, 2008 a nd 2009 are not benchmark years under EPCA section 325(l)(4)(C)(i) a nd therefore are omitted from this table. However, shipment estimates for those years are available in DOE’s spreadsheet model for this lamp type.

14Table III.3 Three-Way Incandescent Lamp Shipmen ts and Benchmark Unit Sales Estimate

Calendar Year NEMA Shipment Data Provided thousands Calendar Year Benchmark Unit Sales Estimate thousands 1990 61,952 2010 51,177 1991 59,858 2011 50,652 1992 60,566 2012 50,131 1993 58,396 2013 49,617 1994 55,867 2014 49,107 1995 58,570 2015 48,603 1996 58,924 2016 48,104 1997 67,047 2017 47,610 1998 60,374 2018 47,121 1999 61,294 2019 46,637 2000 58,034 2020 46,158 2001 58,893 2021 45,684 2002 59,234 2022 45,215 2003 56,870 2023 44,750 2004 57,610 2024 44,291 2005 52,221 2025 43,836 2006 42,825

D. 2,601–3,300 Lumen General Service Incandescent Lamps In consultation with NEMA, DOE collected shipment data for 2,601

− 3,300 Lumen General Service Incandescent Lamps from 1990 through 2006. As stated previously, DOE uses the shipment data as a surrogate for unit sale s data in this anal ysis. The 2,601—3,300 Lumen General Service Incandescent Lamp data reflect a peak in 1997 at approximately 39 million units with lower unit sales occurring on either side of th at peak. Unit sales ranged from approximately

30 to 33 million between 1990 and 1995 and from 28 to 34 million between 2001 and 2006. DOE applied the two curve fits to the historical data, resulting in near ly identical shipment projections between 2010 and 2025. Both projections indicate that unit sale s will trend slightly upward from approximately 34 million in 2010 to approximately 35 million in 2025. The difference between the linear regression and expone ntial curve fit is neve r greater than one-half

15of 1 percent for any year. Therefore, DOE woul d be satisfied that ei ther spreadsheet model would generate a reasonable benchmark unit sales estimate, but is selec ting the exponential curve fit for consistency with the se lection made for rough service, vibration service and 3-way incandescent lamps.

Table III.4 presents the shipment data co llected in consultation with NEMA and the

benchmark unit sales estimate DOE prepared from those data for 2,601

− 3,300 lumen general service incandescent lamps. The results presente d in the column labeled “benchmark unit sales estimate” represent the unit sales proj ection for 2,601—3,300 lumen general service incandescent lamps. The first year of unit sa les reported for these lamps is 2010 because that year is the first one DOE is required to co mpare against actual unit sales. (42 U.S.C. 6295(l)(4)(C)) The years 2007, 2008 and 2009 are not benchmark years under EPCA section 325(l)(4)(C)(i) and therefore are omitted from this table. However, shipment estimates for those years are available in DOE’s spreadsheet model for this lamp type.

16Table III.4 2,601

− 3,300 Lumen General Service Inca ndescent Lamps Shipments and Benchmark Unit Sales Estimate

Calendar Year NEMA Shipment Data Provided thousands Calendar Year Benchmark Unit Sales Estimate thousands 1990 31,383 2010 33,848 1991 30,639 2011 33,913 1992 30,612 2012 33,979 1993 31,493 2013 34,044 1994 29,706 2014 34,110 1995 32,371 2015 34,175 1996 35,306 2016 34,241 1997 39,090 2017 34,307 1998 35,743 2018 34,373 1999 36,602 2019 34,439 2000 37,179 2020 34,506 2001 34,576 2021 34,572 2002 33,632 2022 34,639 2003 33,980 2023 34,705 2004 32,374 2024 34,772 2005 31,065 2025 34,839 2006 28,541

E. Shatter-Resistant Lamps In consultation with NEMA, DOE collected sh ipment data for shatter-resistant lamps from 1990 through 2006. As stated previously, DOE uses the shipment data as a surrogate for unit sales data in this analysis. The shatter-resistant lamp da ta reflect a peak in 1997 at approximately 2 million units with lower unit sales occurring on e ither side of that peak. Unit sales ranged from approximately 1.4 to 1.5 million between 1990 and 1995 and from approximately 1.4 to 1.7 million between 2001 and 2006. DOE applied two curve fits to the histori cal data, resulting in nearly identical shipment proj ections between 2010 and 2025. Both projections indicate that unit sales will trend slightly upward from approxima tely 1.6 million units in 2010 to approximately

1.7 million units in 2025. The difference between the linear regression and exponential curve fit is never greater than one-half of 1 percent for a ny year. Therefore, DOE w ould be satisfied that

17either spreadsheet model would generate a reas onable benchmark unit sales estimate, but is selecting the exponential curve fit for consistenc y with the other four lamp types discussed previously.

Table III.5 presents the shipment data co llected in consultation with NEMA and the benchmark unit sales estimate DOE prepared from those data for shatter-resistant lamps. The results presented in the column labeled “bench mark unit sales estimate” represent the unit sales projection for shatter-resi stant lamps. The first year of unit sales reported for these lamps is 2010 because that year is the first one DOE is requi red to compare against actual unit sales. (42 U.S.C. 6295(l)(4)(C)) The years 2007, 2008 a nd 2009 are not benchmark years under EPCA section 325(l)(4)(C)(i) and therefore are omitted from this table. However, shipment estimates for those years are available in DOE’s spreadsheet model for this lamp type.

18Table III.5 Shatter-Resistant Lamp Shipments and Benchmark Unit Sales Estimate

Calendar Year NEMA Shipment Data Provided thousands Calendar Year Benchmark Unit Sales Estimate thousands 1990 1,515 2010 1,655 1991 1,481 2011 1,659 1992 1,481 2012 1,663 1993 1,526 2013 1,667 1994 1,439 2014 1,671 1995 1,570 2015 1,675 1996 1,714 2016 1,679 1997 1,901 2017 1,684 1998 1,739 2018 1,688 1999 1,780 2019 1,692 2000 1,809 2020 1,696 2001 1,682 2021 1,700 2002 1,637 2022 1,705 2003 1,655 2023 1,709 2004 1,577 2024 1,713 2005 1,513 2025 1,717 2006 1,390

19IV. Proceedings If the Index Is Exceeded Section 321(a)(3)(B) of EISA 2007 in part amends paragraph 325(l)(4) of EPCA by adding paragraphs (D) through (H), which direct DOE to take regulator y action if the actual annual unit sales of any of the five lamp type s exceed the predicted shipments by at least 100 percent ( i.e. , more than double the benchmark unit sa les estimate). (42 U. S.C. 6295(l)(4)(D)-(H)) Each year, NEMA will provide DOE with shipme nt data for the five lamp types from the previous calendar year. DOE will compare thes e actual shipments with the benchmark model estimates for each lamp type and calculate whethe r the index has been exceeded. If the index has been exceeded by at least 100 percent, then DOE must take appropriate regulatory action as outlined in section 325(l)(4)(D) through (H) of EPCA. DOE publishes here the statutory requirements to inform stakeholders of the actions DOE will take if the shipment index is exceeded by at least 100 percent.

A. Rough Service Lamps If the benchmark unit sales estimate for rough service lamps is exce eded by at least 100 percent for the previous calendar year, DOE must (1) issue within 90 days of the end of the previous calendar year a finding that the index has been exceeded, and (2) conduct an accelerated energy conservation standards rule making for rough service lamps to be completed no later than 1 year after the end of the previous calendar y ear. If the Secretary fails to complete this accelerated rulemaking in the allotted time, the statute provides a “backstop requirement” that becomes the regulatory standard for rough serv ice lamps. This backstop requirement would establish standards beginning 1 year after the date of issuance of the finding that the index had been exceeded, and would require rough service la mps to (1) have a shatter-proof coating or

20equivalent technology that complies with NSF/ANS I 51 and is designed to contain the glass if the glass envelope of the lamp is broken and to provide effective containment over the life of the lamp, (2) have a maximum 40-watt limitation, and (3) be sold at retail only in a package containing one lamp.

B. Vibration Service Lamps If the benchmark unit sales estimate for vibration service lamps is exceeded by at least 100 percent for the previous calendar year, DOE must (1) issue within 90 days of the end of the previous calendar year a finding that the index has been exceeded, and (2) conduct an accelerated energy conservation standards rule making for vibration service lamps to be completed no later than 1 year after the end of th e previous calendar year. If the Secretary fails to complete the accelerated rulemaking in the allotted time, the statute provides a backstop requirement that becomes the regulatory standard for vibration se rvice lamps. This backstop requirement would establish standards beginning 1 year after the date of issuance of the finding that the index had been exceeded, and would require vibration service lamps to (1) have a maximum 40-watt limitation, and (2) be sold at retail on ly in a package containing 1 lamp.

C. Three-Way Incandescent Lamps If the benchmark unit sales estimate for 3-wa y incandescent lamps is exceeded by at least 100 percent for the previous calendar year, DOE must (1) issue within 90 days of the end of the previous calendar year a finding that the index has been exceeded, and (2) conduct an accelerated energy conservation standards ru lemaking for 3-way incandescent lamps to be completed no later than 1 year after the end of the previous calendar year. If the Secretary fails to complete the accelerated rulemaking in the allotted time, the statute provides a backstop requirement that

21becomes the regulatory standard for 3-way in candescent lamps. This backstop requirement would establish standards beginning 1 year after the date of issuan ce of the finding that the index had been exceeded, and would require that (1) each filament in a 3-way incandescent lamp meet the new maximum wattage requirements for the re spective lumen range esta blished under section 325(i)(1)(A) of EPCA (42 U.S.C. 6295(i)(1)(A)), and (2) 3-way lamps be sold at retail only in a package containing 1 lamp.

D. 2,601–3,300 Lumen General Service Incandescent Lamps If the benchmark unit sales estim ate for 2,601—3,300 lumen general service incandescent lamps is exceeded by at least 100 percen t for the previous calendar year (or, in the case of a modified spectrum, in the lumen range of 1,951 through 2,475 lumens), DOE will impose the following energy conservation stan dards: (1) a maximum 95-watt limitation on general service inca ndescent lamps in the range of 2,601 through 3,300 lumens, and (2) a requirement that those lamps be sold at re tail only in a package containing 1 lamp.

E. Shatter-Resistant Lamps If the benchmark unit sales estimate for shatte r-resistant lamps is ex ceeded by at least 100 percent for the previous calendar year, DOE must (1) issue within 90 days of the end of the previous calendar year a finding that the index has been exceeded, and (2) conduct an accelerated energy conservation standards rule making for shatter-resistant lamps to be completed no later than 1 year after the end of th e previous calendar year. If the Secretary fails to complete the accelerated rulemaking in the allotted time, the statute provides a backstop requirement that becomes the regulatory standard for shatter-resistant lamps. This backstop requirement would establish standards beginning 1 year after the date of issuance of the finding that the index had

2223 been exceeded, and would require that (1) a ma ximum wattage limitation of 40 watts on shatterresistant lamps, and (2) a requirement that thos e lamps be sold at retail only in a package containing 1 lamp.

F. Potential Termination of Data Collection If DOE issues a final rule establishing ener gy conservation standards for any of the five types of lamps for which data collection is requ ired prior to January 1, 2025, the requirement to

collect and model data for that t ype of lamp shall terminate unless, as part of the rulemaking, the Secretary determines that continued tracking is necessary. If, however, the Secretary imposes a backstop requirement as a result of a failure to complete an accelerated rulemaking in accordance with the statute, the requirement to collect and m odel data for the applicable type of lamp shall continue for 2 years after the effective date of the backstop requirement. (42 U.S.C. 6295(l)(4)(I)(i)-(ii))

G. Review Under the Information Quality Bulletin for Peer Review This report is being disseminated by the De partment of Energy. As such, the document was prepared in compliance with Section 515 of the Treasury and General Government Appropriations Act for Fiscal Year 2001 (P ublic Law 106-554) and information quality guidelines issued by the Department of Energy. This report does not constitute “influential” information, as that term is defined in DOE's information quality guidelines or the Office of Management and Budget's Information Quality Bulletin for Peer Review (Bulletin).