Vol. 79 Tuesday, 

No. 106 June 3, 2014 

Part II 

Department of Energy 

10 CFR Parts 429 and 430 

Energy Conservation Program: Test Procedures for Integrated LightEmitting Diode Lamps; Proposed Rule 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2

32020 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 106 / Tuesday, June 3, 2014 / Proposed Rules 

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY 

10 CFR Parts 429 and 430 

[Docket No. EERE–2011–BT–TP–0071] 

RIN 1904–AC67 

Energy Conservation Program: Test 

Procedures for Integrated LightEmitting Diode Lamps 

AGENCY: Office of Energy Efficiency and 

Renewable Energy, Department of 

Energy. 

ACTION: Supplemental notice of 

proposed rulemaking. 

SUMMARY: On April 9, 2012, the U.S. 

Department of Energy (DOE) published 

a notice of proposed rulemaking (NOPR) 

in which DOE proposed a test procedure 

for light-emitting diode (LED) lamps 

(hereafter referred to as LED lamps). 

This supplemental notice of proposed 

rulemaking (SNOPR), revises DOE’s 

proposal for a new test procedure for 

LED lamps. This SNOPR supports 

implementation of labeling provisions 

by the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) 

and implementation of DOE’s energy 

conservation standards for general 

service lamps that includes general 

service LED lamps. The SNOPR 

continues to define methods for 

measuring the lumen output, input 

power, and relative spectral distribution 

(to determine correlated color 

temperature, or CCT). Further, the 

SNOPR revises the method for 

calculating the lifetime of LED lamps, 

and defines the lifetime as the time 

required for the LED lamp to reach a 

lumen maintenance of 70 percent (that 

is, 70 percent of initial light output). 

Additionally, the SNOPR adds 

calculations for lamp efficacy as well as 

the color rendering index (CRI) of LED 

lamps, which were not proposed in the 

test procedure NOPR. 

DATES: DOE will accept comments, data, 

and information regarding this SNOPR, 

but no later than August 4, 2014. See 

section V, ‘‘Public Participation,’’ for 

details. 

ADDRESSES: Any comments submitted 

must identify the SNOPR for Test 

Procedures for LED lamps, and provide 

docket number EE–2011–BT–TP–0071 

and/or regulatory information number 

(RIN) number 1904–AC67. Comments 

may be submitted using any of the 

following methods: 

1. Federal eRulemaking Portal: 

www.regulations.gov. Follow the 

instructions for submitting comments. 

2. Email: LEDLamps-2011-TP-0071@

ee.doe.gov. Include the docket number 

and/or RIN in the subject line of the 

message. 

3. Mail: Ms. Brenda Edwards, U.S. 

Department of Energy, Building 

Technologies Office, Mailstop EE–5B, 

1000 Independence Avenue SW., 

Washington, DC, 20585–0121. If 

possible, please submit all items on a 

CD. It is not necessary to include 

printed copies. 

4. Hand Delivery/Courier: Ms. Brenda 

Edwards, U.S. Department of Energy, 

Building Technologies Program, 950 

L’Enfant Plaza SW., Suite 600, 

Washington, DC, 20024. Telephone: 

(202) 586–2945. If possible, please 

submit all items on a CD. It is not 

necessary to include printed copies. 

For detailed instructions on 

submitting comments and additional 

information on the rulemaking process, 

see section V of this document (Public 

Participation). 

Docket: The docket is available for 

review at regulations.gov, including 

Federal Register notices, public meeting 

attendee lists and transcripts, 

comments, and other supporting 

documents/materials. All documents in 

the docket are listed in the 

regulations.gov index. However, not all 

documents listed in the index may be 

publicly available, such as information 

that is exempt from public disclosure. 

A link to the docket Web page can be 

found at: www1.eere.energy.gov/

buildings/appliance_standards/

rulemaking.aspx/ruleid/18. This Web 

page will contain a link to the docket for 

this notice on the regulations.gov site. 

The regulations.gov Web page contains 

simple instructions on how to access all 

documents, including public comments, 

in the docket. See section V for 

information on how to submit 

comments through regulations.gov. 

For further information on how to 

submit a comment, review other public 

comments and the docket, or participate 

in the public meeting, contact Ms. 

Brenda Edwards at (202) 586–2945 or by 

email: Brenda.Edwards@ee.doe.gov. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. 

Lucy deButts, U.S. Department of 

Energy, Office of Energy Efficiency and 

Renewable Energy, Building 

Technologies Office, EE–5B, 1000 

Independence Avenue SW., 

Washington, DC, 20585–0121. 

Telephone: (202) 287–1604. Email: 

light_emitting_diodes@ee.doe.gov. 

Ms. Celia Sher, U.S. Department of 

Energy, Office of the General Counsel, 

GC–71, 1000 Independence Avenue 

SW., Washington, DC, 20585–0121. 

Telephone: (202) 287–6122. Email: 

Celia.Sher@hq.doe.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Table of Contents 

I. Authority and Background 

II. Summary of the Supplemental Notice of 

Proposed Rulemaking 

III. Discussion 

A. Scope of Applicability 

B. Standby and Off-Mode 

C. Proposed Approach for Determining 

Lumen Output, Input Power, Lamp 

Efficacy, Correlated Color Temperature, 

and Color Rendering Index 

1. NOPR Proposals 

2. Test Conditions 

3. Test Setup 

4. Test Method 

D. Proposed Approach for Lifetime 

Measurements 

1. LED Lamp Lifetime Definition 

2. NOPR Proposals 

3. SNOPR Proposed Lifetime Method 

E. Proposed Approach for Standby Mode 

Power 

F. Basic Model, Sampling Plan, and 

Reported Value 

1. Basic Model 

2. Sampling Plan 

3. Reported Value 

G. Rounding Requirements 

1. Lumen Output 

2. Input Power 

3. Lamp Efficacy 

4. Correlated Color Temperature 

5. Color Rendering Index 

6. Annual Energy Cost 

7. Lifetime 

8. Life 

9. Standby Mode Power 

H. Acceptable Methods for Initial 

Certification or Labeling 

I. Laboratory Accreditation 

J. State Preemption for Efficiency Metrics 

K. Effective and Compliance Date 

IV. Procedural Issues and Regulatory Review 

A. Review Under Executive Order 12866 

B. Review under the Regulatory Flexibility 

Act 

1. Estimated Small Business Burden 

2. Duplication, Overlap, and Conflict With 

Other Rules and Regulations 

3. Significant Alternatives to the Proposed 

Rule 

C. Review Under the Paperwork Reduction 

Act of 1995 

D. Review Under the National 

Environmental Policy Act of 1969 

E. Review Under Executive Order 13132 

F. Review Under Executive Order 12988 

G. Review Under the Unfunded Mandates 

Reform Act of 1995 

H. Review Under the Treasury and General 

Government Appropriations Act, 1999 

I. Review Under Executive Order 12630 

J. Review Under Treasury and General 

Government Appropriations Act, 2001 

K. Review Under Executive Order 13211 

L. Review Under Section 32 of the Federal 

Energy Administration Act of 1974 

V. Public Participation 

A. Submission of Comments 

B. Issues on Which DOE Seeks Comment 

VI. Approval of the Office of the Secretary 

I. Authority and Background 

Title III of the Energy Policy and 

Conservation Act of 1975 (42 U.S.C. 

6291, et seq.; ‘‘EPCA’’) sets forth a 

variety of provisions designed to 

improve energy efficiency. (All 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2

Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 106 / Tuesday, June 3, 2014 / Proposed Rules 32021 

1FTC uses the term ‘bulb,’ while DOE uses the 

term ‘lamp.’ Bulb and lamp refer to the same 

product. 

2FTC defines general service LED lamps as a 

lamp that is a consumer product; has a medium 

screw base; has a lumen range 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. This proposed 

test procedure rulemaking could be applied to 

general service LED lamps as defined by FTC as 

well as all other integrated LED lamps as discussed 

in section 0 of this SNOPR. 

3Although ‘light output’ is the technically correct 

term, FTC uses the term ‘brightness’ on the Lighting 

Facts label because FTC’s research indicated that 

consumers prefer the term ‘brightness’ to ‘light 

output.’ 

4FTC uses the term ‘life’ while DOE uses the term 

‘lifetime.’ Life and lifetime have the same meaning. 

5American National Standards Institute. 

6 Illuminating Engineering Society of North 

America (also abbreviated as IES). 

7 ‘‘Nomenclature and Definitions for Illuminating 

Engineering.’’ Approved by ANSI on October 16, 

2009. Approved by IES on November 15, 2009. 

8 ‘‘Approved Method: Electrical and Photometric 

Measurements of Solid-State Lighting Products.’’ 

Approved by IES on December 31, 2007. 

9 ‘‘Household electrical appliances— 

Measurement of standby power.’’ Edition 2.0 2011– 

01. 

10 ‘‘ENERGY STAR Program Requirements for 

Lamps (Light Bulbs): Eligibility Criteria—Version 

1.0.’’ U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 

August 28, 2013. 

11P-n junction is the boundary between p-type 

and n-type material in a semiconductor device, 

such as LEDs. P-n junctions are active sites where 

current can flow readily in one direction but not in 

the other direction—in other words, a diode. 

12Exciting current is the current passing through 

an LED chip during steady state operation. 

references to EPCA refer to the statute 

as amended through the American 

Energy Manufacturing Technical 

Corrections Act (AEMTCA), Public Law 

112–210 (Dec. 18, 2012)). Part B of title 

III, which for editorial reasons was 

redesignated as Part A upon 

incorporation into the U.S. Code (42 

U.S.C. 6291–6309, as codified), 

establishes the ‘‘Energy Conservation 

Program for Consumer Products Other 

Than Automobiles.’’ 

Under EPCA, this program consists of 

four parts: (1) testing, (2) labeling, (3) 

Federal energy conservation standards, 

and (4) certification and enforcement 

procedures. This SNOPR proposes test 

procedures that manufacturers of 

integrated LED lamps (hereafter referred 

to as ‘‘LED lamps’’) would use to meet 

two requirements, namely, to: (1) satisfy 

any future energy conservation 

standards for general service LED lamps, 

and (2) meet obligations under labeling 

requirements for LED lamps 

promulgated by the Federal Trade 

Commission (FTC). 

First, this SNOPR would be used to 

assess the performance of LED lamps 

relative to any potential energy 

conservation standards in a future 

rulemaking that includes general service 

LED lamps. DOE is currently developing 

energy conservation standards for 

general service lamps (GSLs), a category 

of lamps that includes general service 

LED lamps. See 78 FR 73737 (Dec. 9, 

2013). 

Second, the LED lamp SNOPR 

supports obligations under labeling 

requirements promulgated by FTC 

under section 324(a)(6) of EPCA (42 

U.S.C. 6294(a)(6)). The Energy 

Independence and Security Act of 2007 

(EISA 2007) section 321(b) amended 

EPCA (42 U.S.C. 6294(a)(2)(D)) to direct 

FTC to consider the effectiveness of 

lamp labeling for power levels or watts, 

light output or lumens, and lamp 

lifetime. This SNOPR supports FTC’s 

determination that LED lamps, which 

had previously not been labeled, require 

labels under EISA section 321(b) and 42 

U.S.C. 6294(a)(6) in order to assist 

consumers in making purchasing 

decisions. 75 FR 41696, 41698 (July 19, 

2010). 

FTC published a final rule for light 

bulb 1 labeling (Lighting Facts) that 

required compliance on January 1, 2012. 

75 FR 41696 (July 19, 2010). The FTC 

Lighting Facts label covers three types 

of medium screw base lamps: general 

service incandescent lamps (GSIL), 

compact fluorescent lamps (CFL), and 

general service LED lamps.2 The label 

requires manufacturers to disclose 

information about the lamp’s 

brightness 3 (lumen output), estimated 

annual energy cost, life 4 (lifetime), light 

appearance (CCT), and energy use 

(input power). FTC requires 

manufacturers to calculate the estimated 

annual energy cost by multiplying 

together the energy used, annual 

operating hours, and an estimate for 

energy cost per kilowatt-hour. FTC 

references DOE test procedures, when 

available, for testing lamps for the FTC 

Lighting Facts label. See 42 U.S.C. 

6294(c). This SNOPR would enable FTC 

to reference a DOE test procedure for 

LED lamps. DOE invites comments on 

all aspects of the SNOPR for LED lamps. 

II. Summary of the Supplemental 

Notice of Proposed Rulemaking 

In this SNOPR, DOE proposes test 

procedures for determining the lumen 

output, input power, lamp efficacy, 

CCT, CRI, lifetime, and standby mode 

power of an LED lamp. DOE proposes to 

define an LED lamp using the ANSI 5/

IESNA 6 RP–16–2010 7 definition of an 

integrated LED lamp. DOE pursued an 

SNOPR for two main reasons: (1) to 

revise the method of measuring lifetime 

based on public comment and (2) to add 

directions for calculating the metrics 

lamp efficacy and CRI and standby 

mode power to support the ongoing 

general service lamp rulemaking. To 

determine lumen output, input power, 

CCT, and CRI, DOE proposes to 

incorporate by reference IES LM–79– 

2008.8 DOE reviewed several potential 

approaches to testing lamp lumen 

output, input power, CCT, and CRI, and 

determined that this IES standard is the 

most appropriate based on discussions 

with industry experts. IES LM–79–2008 

appears to yield reliable results, and 

industry generally uses it to measure 

photometric characteristics of LED 

lamps. To determine the standby mode 

power, DOE proposes to incorporate by 

reference International Electrotechnical 

Commission (IEC) 62301.9 In addition, 

DOE proposes to calculate the efficacy 

of an LED lamp in units of lumens per 

watt by dividing the measured initial 

lamp lumen output in lumens by the 

measured lamp input power in watts. 

Lastly, no industry standards are 

available for determining the lifetime of 

LED lamps. Therefore, the SNOPR 

proposes a method for measuring and 

projecting LED lamp lifetime that uses 

a continuous equation based on the 

underlying exponential decay function 

in the ENERGY STAR Program 

Requirements for Lamps (Light Bulbs): 

Eligibility Criteria—Version 1.0.10

III. Discussion 

A. Scope of Applicability 

EISA 2007 section 321(a)(1)(B) added 

the definition for LED as a p-n 

junction 11 solid state device, the 

radiated output of which, either in the 

infrared region, the visible region, or the 

ultraviolet region, is a function of the 

physical construction, material used, 

and exciting current 12 of the device. (42 

U.S.C. 6291(30)(CC)) In the NOPR, 

published on April 9, 2012, DOE stated 

that this rulemaking applies to LED 

lamps that meet DOE’s proposed 

definition of an LED lamp, which is 

based on the term as defined by ANSI/ 

IESNA RP–16–2010, ‘‘Nomenclature 

and Definitions for Illuminating 

Engineering.’’ This standard defines 

integrated LED lamps as an integrated 

assembly that comprises LED packages 

(components) or LED arrays (modules) 

(collectively referred to as an LED 

source), LED driver, ANSI standard 

base, and other optical, thermal, 

mechanical and electrical components 

(such as phosphor layers, insulating 

materials, fasteners to hold components 

within the lamp together, and electrical 

wiring). The LED lamp is intended to 

connect directly to a branch circuit 

through a corresponding ANSI standard 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2

32022 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 106 / Tuesday, June 3, 2014 / Proposed Rules 

13A notation in the form ‘‘NEMA, Public Meeting 

Transcript, No. 7 at p. 2’’ identifies a statement 

made in a public meeting that DOE has received 

and has included in the docket of this rulemaking. 

This particular notation refers to a comment: (1) 

submitted during the public meeting on May 3, 

2012; (2) in document number 7 in the docket of 

this rulemaking; and (3) appearing on page 2 of the 

transcript. 

14 IEC standards are available online at 

www.iec.ch. 

socket. 77 FR 21038, 21041 (April 9, 

2012) 

The National Electrical Manufacturers 

Association (hereafter referred to as 

NEMA) agreed with the proposed scope 

and incorporation of ANSI/IESNA RP– 

16–2010 for the definition of LED 

lamps. (NEMA, Public Meeting 

Transcript, No. 7 at p. 2 13) DOE 

received no adverse comment on this 

proposal. Thus, in this SNOPR, DOE 

proposes to maintain the scope and 

definition of LED lamps. 

B. Standby and Off-Mode 

EPCA directs DOE to amend test 

procedures ‘‘to include standby mode 

and off mode energy consumption . . . 

with such energy consumption 

integrated into the overall energy 

efficiency, energy consumption, or other 

energy descriptor for each covered 

product, unless the Secretary 

determines that—(i) the current test 

procedures for a covered product 

already fully account for and 

incorporate the standby and off mode 

energy consumption of the covered 

product . . .’’ 42 U.S.C. 6295(gg)(2)(A(i) 

Because LED lamps are placed in Part A 

of EPCA, they are covered consumer 

products, and thus the standby and off 

mode applicability of these products 

must be reviewed. 

First, to provide context for standby 

and off-modes, active mode is defined 

as the condition in which an energyusing product—is connected to a main 

power source; has been activated; and 

provides one or more main functions.10 

CFR 430.2 DOE’s proposals for active 

mode test metrics include lumen 

output, input power, lamp efficacy, 

CCT, CRI, and lifetime. 

Standby mode is defined as the 

condition in which energy-using 

product—is connected to a main power 

source; and offers one or more of the 

following user-oriented or protective 

functions: to facilitate the activation or 

deactivation of other functions 

(including active mode) by remote 

switch (including remote control), 

internal sensor, or timer; or continuous 

functions, including information or 

status displays (including clocks) or 

sensor-based functions.10 CFR 430.2 

Some LED lamps can be operated by a 

remote control to activate active mode 

or to change the appearance of the light 

(color or dimming). Therefore, standby 

mode applies to LED lamps. 

Off mode is defined as the condition 

in which an energy using product—is 

connected to a main power source; and 

is not providing any standby or active 

mode function.10 CFR 430.2 LED lamps 

do not operate in off mode because 

when connected to a main power 

source, the LED lamp is either in active 

mode or standby mode. No other modes 

of operation exist for LED lamps beyond 

active and standby mode. 

EPCA directs DOE to amend its test 

procedures for all covered products to 

integrate measures of standby mode and 

off mode energy consumption, if 

technically feasible. (42 U.S.C. 

6295(gg)(2)(A)) Standby mode and off 

mode energy must be incorporated into 

the overall energy efficiency, energy 

consumption, or other energy descriptor 

for each covered product unless the 

current test procedures already account 

for and incorporate standby and off 

mode energy consumption or such 

integration is technically infeasible. If 

an integrated test procedure is 

technically infeasible, DOE must 

prescribe a separate standby mode and 

off mode energy use test procedure for 

the covered product, if technically 

feasible. Id. Any such amendment must 

consider the most current versions of 

IEC Standard 62301, ‘‘Household 

electrical appliances—measurement of 

standby power,’’ and IEC Standard 

62087, ‘‘Methods of measurements for 

the power consumption of audio, video, 

and related equipment,’’ 14 as 

applicable. 

DOE proposes separate test methods 

for standby and active mode metrics. 

This proposal is consistent with other 

lighting products (fluorescent lamp 

ballasts and metal halide ballasts) which 

use separate test methods for active and 

standby modes. Any future energy 

conservation standards that cover LED 

lamps will consider the most effective 

method of addressing both active and 

standby mode energy use. DOE proposes 

a method of measuring standby mode 

power in section III.E. 

DOE requests comment on its 

characterization of the modes of 

operation that apply to LED lamps. 

C. Proposed Approach for Determining 

Lumen Output, Input Power, Lamp 

Efficacy, Correlated Color Temperature, 

and Color Rendering Index 

1. NOPR Proposals 

The NOPR proposed to incorporate 

IES LM–79–2008 for determining lumen 

output, input power, and CCT, with 

some modifications. 77 FR at 21041 

(April 9, 2012) IES LM–79–2008 

specifies the test setup and conditions at 

which the measurements and 

calculations must be performed. These 

include ambient conditions, power 

supply characteristics, lamp orientation, 

and stabilization methods for LED 

lamps, and instrumentation and 

electrical settings. These requirements, 

and any related comments, are further 

discussed in the sections III.C.1 through 

III.C.4. 

Kristopher Kritzer (hereafter referred 

to as Kritzer) expressed support for 

adopting the complete NOPR test 

method and backed DOE’s efforts to 

adopt industry practices for testing LED 

lamps. (Kritzer, No. 3 at p. 1) Lutron 

Electronics Company, Inc. (hereafter 

referred to as Lutron) and NEMA did 

not support all test methods proposed in 

the NOPR, but did agree that IES LM– 

79–2008 should be used to determine 

lumen output, input power, and CCT. 

(Lutron, Public Meeting Transcript, No. 

7 at p. 25; NEMA, Public Meeting 

Transcript, No. 7 at p. 2) However, 

several interested parties expressed 

concern with the overall proposal. Delft 

University of Technology (which refers 

to itself as TUD) and an anonymous 

commenter had reservations about 

adopting the test methods proposed in 

the NOPR. TUD indicated that the 

NOPR proposal will not guarantee 

tested LED products are well-qualified. 

(Anonymous, No. 8 at p. 1; TUD, No. 15 

at p. 1) NEMA, the California Investor 

Owned Utilities (hereafter referred to as 

CA IOUs), and Philips Lighting 

Electronics N.A. (hereafter referred to as 

Philips) urged that DOE not modify or 

supplement any industry standard. 

(NEMA, No. 16 at p. 2, 7; CA IOUs, No. 

19 at p. 5, 6; Philips, Public Meeting 

Transcript, No. 7 at p. 114) Finally, the 

Appliance Standards Awareness Project, 

the American Council for an Energy 

Efficient Economy, and the Natural 

Resources Defense Council (hereafter 

referred to as the Joint Comment) stated 

that test procedures need to mimic real 

world installations whenever possible 

and, when knowledge of real world 

installations is not available, the test 

method needs to approximate a worstcase installation scenario. (Joint 

Comment, No. 18 at p. 1) 

IES is the recognized technical 

authority on illumination, and the IES 

LM–79–2008 standard was prepared by 

the IES subcommittee on Solid-State 

Lighting Sources of the IESNA Testing 

Procedure Committee. IES LM–79–2008 

was also developed in collaboration 

with the ANSI Solid State Lighting Joint 

Working Group C78–09 and C82–09 

comprising individuals from several 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2

Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 106 / Tuesday, June 3, 2014 / Proposed Rules 32023 

15 IES standards use the reference 2.0, 3.0, etc. for 

each primary section heading. Sub-sections under 

each of these sections are referenced as 2.1, 2.2, 3.1, 

3.2, etc. This SNOPR refers to each IES section 

exactly as it is referenced in the standard. 

16 ‘‘IES Approved Method for the Electrical and 

Photometric Measurement of Fluorescent Lamps.’’ 

Approved January 31, 2009. 

17Root mean square (RMS) voltage/current is a 

statistical measure of the magnitude of a voltage/

current signal. RMS voltage/current is equal to the 

square root of the mean of all squared instantaneous 

voltages/currents over one complete cycle of the 

voltage/current signal. 

18Fundamental frequency, often referred to as 

fundamental, is defined as the lowest frequency of 

a periodic waveform. 

organizations. DOE believes that the 

committee members who worked on 

developing the IES LM–79–2008 

standard represent relevant industry 

groups and interested parties. Based on 

an independent review by DOE and 

general acceptance by industry, DOE 

proposes that IES LM–79–2008 specifies 

much of the information that is required 

for providing a complete test procedure 

for determining lumen output, input 

power, CCT, and CRI of LED lamps. 

DOE agrees that the LED lamp test 

procedure needs to mimic real world 

installations and believes that the 

procedures described in the IES LM–79– 

2008 standard are representative of such 

conditions. IES LM–79–2008 specifies 

the test conditions and setup at which 

the measurements and calculations 

must be performed. However, DOE 

proposes some clarifications to establish 

a repeatable procedure for all LED lamp 

testing. These clarifications to IES LM– 

79–2008 include mounting orientation 

and electrical setting requirements. 

These requirements, and any 

clarifications proposed by DOE, are 

further discussed in the sections III.C.2 

through III.C.4. 

2. Test Conditions 

In the NOPR, DOE proposed that the 

ambient conditions for testing LED 

lamps be as specified in section 2.0 15 of 

IES LM–79–2008. 77 FR at 21041. These 

conditions include setup and ambient 

temperature control, as well as air 

movement requirements. Both are 

discussed in further detail below. 

Section 2.2 of IES LM–79–2008 

specifies that photometric 

measurements shall be taken at an 

ambient temperature of 25 degrees 

Celsius (°C) ±1 °C. In the NOPR, DOE 

indicated that a tolerance of 1°C for the 

ambient temperature is practical, limits 

the impact of ambient temperature on 

measurements, and would not be 

burdensome because the instruments 

used to measure the temperature 

provide greater accuracy than required, 

allowing the test laboratories to 

maintain the temperature within the 

required tolerance for testing. Id. 

Section 2.2 of IES LM–79–2008 further 

specifies that the temperature shall be 

measured at a point not more than one 

meter from the LED lamp and at the 

same height as the lamp. The standard 

requires that the temperature sensor that 

is used for measurements be shielded 

from direct optical radiation from the 

lamp or any other source to reduce the 

impact of radiated heat on the ambient 

temperature measurement. The NOPR 

stated that this setup for measuring and 

controlling ambient temperature is 

appropriate for testing because it 

requires that the lamp be tested at room 

temperature and in an environment that 

is commonly used for testing other 

lighting technologies. Id. DOE did not 

receive adverse comments, and 

therefore maintains this proposal for 

ambient temperature conditions in the 

SNOPR. 

In the NOPR, DOE proposed that the 

requirement for air movement around 

the LED lamp be as specified in section 

2.4 of IES LM–79–2008, which requires 

that the air flow around the LED lamp 

be such that it does not affect the lumen 

output measurements of the tested 

lamp. Id. DOE also considered 

specifying a method for determination 

of a draft-free environment, such as that 

in section 4.3 of IES LM–9–2009,16

which requires that a single ply tissue 

paper be held in place of the lamp to 

allow for visual observation of any 

drafts. 

Philips, Osram Sylvania, Inc. 

(hereafter referred to as OSI), and NEMA 

all indicated that the surrounding air 

temperature and airflow for LED lamps 

does not have a noticeable impact on 

long-term lumen degradation. Based on 

this, DOE believes that the IES LM–79– 

2008 air movement requirements 

proposed in the NOPR are more than 

adequate to ensure the accuracy of test 

data. (Philips, Public Meeting 

Transcript, No. 7 at p. 27; OSI, Public 

Meeting Transcript, No. 7 at pp. 27–28; 

NEMA, Public Meeting Transcript, No. 

7 at pp. 2–3; NEMA, No. 16 at p. 2–3) 

However, other stakeholders suggested 

adding quantitative requirements for air 

movement. The People’s Republic of 

China (hereafter referred to as P.R. 

China) suggested that air movement in 

the vicinity of the luminaire not exceed 

0.2 m/s. For lamps designed with a 

larger tolerance for ambient temperature 

changes, faster air movement may be 

acceptable. (P.R. China, No. 12 at p. 3) 

The Joint Comment noted that the air 

movement procedures in IES LM–79– 

2008 are informative, but not very 

specific. Therefore, they recommended 

that DOE investigate a quantitative 

approach so that air flow around the 

device is better understood. However, 

the Joint Comment expressed concern 

that direct measurement of the airflow 

(anemometry) would increase the 

testing burden to manufacturers 

substantially; instead, they 

recommended DOE investigate a 

suitable proxy measure to judge the 

stability of the airflow around the lamp. 

As an example, they suggested DOE may 

want to consider stability criteria on a 

measurement of the case temperature. 

The Joint Comment noted that it is 

likely that other parameters may also 

provide valuable information about the 

airflow while minimizing testing 

burden. (Joint Comment, No. 18 at p. 3) 

Although DOE agrees that the air 

movement requirement in IES LM–79– 

2008 could be more precise, DOE is 

maintaining its proposal from the NOPR 

not to modify the surrounding air 

temperature and airflow specifications 

provided in IES LM–79–2008. DOE does 

not believe that additional requirements 

to establish a draft-free environment 

would improve measurement accuracy 

relative to current industry practice. 

Furthermore, specifying a quantitative 

procedure for measuring air movement 

would result in an unnecessary increase 

to testing burden. Therefore, in this 

SNOPR, DOE maintains its proposal to 

retain the requirements in IES LM–79– 

2008 to ensure that air movement is 

minimized to acceptable levels. These 

requirements would apply to lamps 

measured in both active mode and 

standby mode. 

3. Test Setup 

a. Power Supply 

In the NOPR, DOE proposed that 

section 3.1 and 3.2 of IES LM–79–2008 

be incorporated by reference to specify 

requirements for both alternating 

current (AC) and direct current (DC) 

power supplies. 77 FR at 21042. Section 

3.1 specifies that an AC power supply 

shall have a sinusoidal voltage 

waveshape at the input frequency 

required by an LED lamp such that the 

root mean square (RMS) 17 summation 

of the harmonic components does not 

exceed three percent of the fundamental 

frequency 18 while operating the LED 

lamp. Section 3.2 of IES LM–79–2008 

also requires that the voltage of an AC 

power supply (RMS voltage) or DC 

power supply (instantaneous voltage) 

applied to the LED lamp be within ±0.2 

percent of the specified lamp input 

voltage (see section III.C.3.d for 

discussion of the proposed electrical 

settings, including input voltage). These 

requirements are achievable with 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2

32024 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 106 / Tuesday, June 3, 2014 / Proposed Rules 

minimal testing burden and provide 

reasonable stringency in terms of power 

quality based on their similarity to 

voltage tolerance requirements for 

testing of other lighting technologies. 

DOE did not receive adverse comment 

on this proposal and, therefore, this 

proposal remains unchanged for the 

SNOPR. These power supply 

requirements would apply to lamps 

measured in both active mode and 

standby mode. 

b. Instrumentation 

In the NOPR, DOE proposed that 

instrumentation requirements for the 

AC power meter and the AC and DC 

voltmeter and ammeter, as well as the 

acceptable tolerance for these 

instruments, be as specified in section 

8.0 of IES LM–79–2008. Id. Section 8.1 

of IES LM–79–2008 specifies that for 

DC-input LED lamps, a DC voltmeter 

and DC ammeter shall be connected 

between the DC power supply and the 

LED lamp under test. The DC voltmeter 

shall be connected across the electrical 

power input of the LED lamp, and the 

input electrical power shall be 

calculated as the product of the 

measured input voltage and current. 

Section 8.2 of IES LM–79–2008 specifies 

that the tolerance for the DC voltage and 

current measurement instruments shall 

be ±0.1 percent. For AC-input LED 

lamps, section 8.1 of IES LM–79–2008 

further specifies that an AC power meter 

shall be connected between the AC 

power supply and the LED lamp under 

test. The AC power, input voltage, and 

current shall be measured. Section 8.2 

of IES LM–79–2008 specifies that the 

tolerance of the AC voltage and current 

measurement instruments shall be ±0.2 

percent and the tolerance of the AC 

power meter shall be ±0.5 percent. In 

the NOPR, DOE concluded that the 

electrical instrumentation requirements 

set forth in section 8.0 of IES LM–79– 

2008 are achievable and provide 

reasonable stringency in terms of 

measurement tolerance based on their 

similarity to instrument tolerance 

requirements for testing of other lighting 

technologies. Id. DOE did not receive 

adverse comment on these electrical 

instrumentation requirements and, 

therefore, this proposal remains 

unchanged for the SNOPR. 

Regarding photometric 

instrumentation used for measuring 

lumen output, CCT, and CRI, DOE 

proposed in the NOPR that either a 

sphere-spectroradiometer, spherephotometer, or goniophotometer system 

be used for lumen output measurement 

of the LED lamp as specified in IES LM– 

79–2008. DOE requested comment on 

the differences in values measured by 

an integrating sphere (via photometer or 

spectroradiometer) versus a 

goniophotometer. 77 FR at 21042 NEMA 

commented that both systems are 

appropriate for lumen determination, 

but acknowledged that a perfect 

correlation between the two techniques 

is not possible. (NEMA, No. 16 at p. 3) 

While DOE recognizes that the 

integrating sphere and goniophotometer 

(a goniometer fitted with a photometer 

as the light detector) are both valid 

means of photometric measurement, 

DOE is concerned about the potential 

for a difference in the measured values. 

A test procedure that yields more than 

one possible value depending on 

instrumentation presents problems for 

certification and enforcement. If DOE 

and the manufacturer use different test 

methods, DOE could find that a lamp 

certified as compliant could be tested as 

non-compliant during a verification or 

enforcement proceeding. IES LM–79– 

2008 does not explicitly specify the 

scanning resolution (i.e., quantity and 

location of measurements around the 

lamp), and instead provides guidance 

that must be implemented differently 

for each lamp. DOE also determined that 

further specification of the 

goniophotometer method is 

unreasonable, because the scanning 

resolution specification would need to 

be adequate for the lamp that requires 

the finest resolution. This would likely 

present an overly burdensome test 

method for many other lamps that could 

be measured at a lower resolution. In 

contrast, use of an integrating sphere 

enables photometric characteristics of 

the LED lamp to be determined with a 

single measurement. Therefore, 

integrating spheres are the preferred 

method for photometric measurement 

due to the reduction in time required for 

testing. 

In consideration of the lack of 

measurement correlation between 

integrating spheres and 

goniophotometers and the reduced 

burden and much higher incidence of 

use of integrating spheres, DOE 

proposes in the SNOPR to require all 

photometric measurements, including 

lumen output, CCT, and CRI to be 

carried out in an integrating sphere and 

that goniometer systems must not be 

used. Therefore, DOE proposes that the 

instrumentation used for lumen output 

measurements be as described in 

sections 9.1 and 9.2 of IES LM–79–2008, 

and CCT and CRI measurements be as 

described in section 12.0 of IES LM–79– 

2008 with the exclusion of section 12.2 

of IES LM–79–2008, as goniometers 

must not be used. DOE invites 

interested parties to comment on the 

proposal to require all photometric 

values be measured by an integrating 

sphere (via photometer or 

spectroradiometer). These 

instrumentation requirements would 

apply to lamps measured in both active 

mode and standby mode. 

c. Lamp Mounting and Orientation 

In the NOPR, DOE considered testing 

LED lamps as specified in section 6.0 of 

IES LM–79–2008, which states that LED 

lamps shall be tested in the operating 

orientation recommended by the lamp 

manufacturer for the intended use of the 

LED lamp. Id. As discussed in the 

NOPR, DOE determined that 

manufacturers do not typically specify 

the operating orientation for an LED 

lamp in their product literature. Further, 

DOE indicated that it is possible 

manufacturers would recommend an 

orientation for testing that provides the 

highest lumen output rather than the 

orientation in which the lamp is most 

frequently operated in practice. 

Therefore, the NOPR proposed that an 

LED lamp be mounted as specified in 

section 2.3 of IES LM–79–2008 and be 

positioned in the base-up, base-down, 

and horizontal orientations for testing. 

Numerous commenters raised 

concerns about DOE’s proposal. General 

Electric Lighting (hereafter referred to as 

GE), Philips, NEMA, Samsung 

Electronics (hereafter referred to as 

Samsung), and P.R. China commented 

that the base-up and base-down 

orientations constitute the best and 

worst-case scenarios. (GE, Public 

Meeting Transcript, No. 7 at p. 29; 

Philips, Public Meeting Transcript, No. 

7 at pp. 29–30; NEMA, No. 16 at p. 3; 

Samsung, No. 14 at p. 1; China, No. 12 

at p. 3) Samsung stated that testing in 

the base up and base down positions is 

also consistent with ENERGY STAR test 

procedures. (Samsung, No. 14 at p. 1) In 

addition, GE and NEMA commented 

that testing in the horizontal position 

with either type of sphere will add 

uncertainty to the lumen output 

measurement, and that testing in the 

horizontal position with a 

goniophotometer is very difficult or 

even impossible. (GE, Public Meeting 

Transcript, No. 7 at pp. 42–43; NEMA, 

No. 16 at p. 3) Underwriter Laboratories 

(hereafter referred to as UL) indicated 

that shadowing is an issue with testing 

in the horizontal position. Lamps are 

usually supported from above or below, 

and if tested horizontally the support 

structure could interfere with the light 

measurement. (UL, Public Meeting 

Transcript, No. 7 at p. 54) NEMA 

commented that current FTC instruction 

for CFLs does not require testing in 

multiple orientations, only that the 

manufacturer specify if an orientation 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2

Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 106 / Tuesday, June 3, 2014 / Proposed Rules 32025 

19 IEC/PAS 62612: Self-ballasted LED-lamps for 

general lighting services—Performance 

requirements. 20CLTC, ‘‘Omni-Directional Lamp Testing’’ 

Prepared for PG&E and CLASP, February 25th, 

2013. http://www.energy.ca.gov/appliances/

2013rulemaking/documents/responses/Lighting_12- 

AAER-2B/California_IOUs_Response_to_the_

Invitation_to_Participate_for_LED_Lamps_

REFERENCE/PGandE_2013a_Omni-Directional_

Lamp_Testing-Report_Draft.pdf. 

change will result in a greater than five 

percent difference in measured 

performance. (NEMA, No. 16 at p. 6) 

The Republic of Korea (hereafter 

referred to as South Korea) suggested 

that DOE be consistent with both 

International Electrotechnical 

Commission (IEC) 62612 19 and IES LM– 

79–2008, which require that the 

orientation of lamps during testing 

follow the manufacturer’s 

recommendations. (South Korea, No. 17 

at p. 2) Finally, P.R. China noted that 

testing in the horizontal position will 

increase the cost of the testing as well 

as the total time required for testing. 

(P.R. China, No. 12 at p. 3) 

Other commenters supported DOE’s 

proposals and suggested further 

research. The Joint Comment and the 

CA IOUs agreed with DOE’s proposal to 

include the horizontal position for 

lumen output testing because it is likely 

a worst-case condition. This is because 

heat sink fins are most effective at 

dissipating heat when air flow is 

parallel to the direction of the fins, 

rather than when air flow is 

perpendicular to the fins. Because most 

heat sink fins are parallel to the body of 

the lamp, they are likely to dissipate 

heat differently when the lamp is 

oriented vertically than when oriented 

horizontally. When heat is not 

dissipated effectively in a lamp, lumen 

output generally decreases. (Joint 

Comment, No. 18 at p. 4; CA IOUs, No. 

19 at p. 6) In addition, the CA IOUs 

indicated that they expect to have LED 

lamp performance data collected in all 

three orientations by the end of 2012 

(subsequently published in February 

2013).20 The CA IOUs further 

commented that manufacturer concerns 

about testing in the horizontal position 

are not an issue for testing in a spherespectroradiometer or spherephotometer. The CA IOUs stated that 

accurate horizontal measurements are 

regularly taken for other lamp 

technologies, and they do not believe 

any unique challenge exists for 

measuring LED lamps that do not exist 

for other lamps of similar shapes and 

base types. (CA IOUs, No. 19 at p. 6) 

The Joint Comment suggested that DOE 

investigate whether shadowing is a 

significant concern in a 

goniophotometer when the lamp is 

configured horizontally. (Joint 

Comment, No. 18 at p. 4) The Joint 

Comment also suggested that DOE 

consider the appropriateness of testing 

at intermediate angles for certain types 

of lamps that contain heat pipes, noting 

that heat pipes often have the best heat 

transfer performance at inclinations of 

60–70 degrees. (Joint Comment, No. 18 

at p. 4) 

In light of commenters’ varying 

opinions about the impact of lamp 

orientation on lamp performance, DOE 

collected test data for several LED lamps 

tested in each of the three orientations. 

DOE investigated two sets of 

photometric test data, the first provided 

by ENERGY STAR and the second 

(mentioned by the CA IOUs in the 

previous paragraph) from a collaborative 

testing effort between the Pacific Gas 

and Electric Company (hereafter 

referred to as PG&E), California Lighting 

Technology Center (hereafter referred to 

as CLTC), and the Collaborative 

Labeling and Appliance Standards 

Program (hereafter referred to as 

CLASP). Id. These test data represent 10 

samples each of 47 different LED lamp 

products. Of the 47 lamp products 

tested, 36 were mounted in base-up, 

base-down, and horizontal 

configurations, and 11 were mounted in 

base-up and base-down configurations. 

DOE analyzed the data to determine the 

variation of input power, lumen output, 

CCT, and CRI in each of the three 

orientations. The analysis of the test 

data revealed that some lamp models 

exhibited variation between the three 

orientations. Of the three orientations, 

analysis indicated that the base-up and 

base-down orientations represent the 

best (highest lumen output) and worst 

(lowest lumen output) case scenarios. 

Therefore, DOE believes that there is no 

need to test horizontally. 

The Joint Comment stated that other 

lamp orientations may represent the 

best-case scenario and suggested that 

DOE investigate testing at intermediate 

angles, such as 60 to 70 degrees. DOE 

notes that intermediate angles could 

represent a best-case scenario for some 

lamps; however, testing LED lamps at 

these angles is not common industry 

practice. Although there is no data 

available for testing LED lamps at 

intermediate angles, DOE consulted an 

LED lamp manufacturer as to whether 

intermediate angle testing could be a 

best-case scenario for some LED lamps. 

The manufacturer indicated that this 

could improve efficiency theoretically; 

however, this possible improvement 

would be negligible and likely within 

the measurement error of the lumen 

output measuring equipment. From this, 

DOE has determined that these 

performance gains would not be 

measureable. Therefore, DOE is not 

proposing testing of LED lamps at 

intermediate angles. 

As mentioned above, DOE also 

received comments about whether it 

was possible to test LED lamps in all 

potential orientations. GE, NEMA, and 

UL indicated that testing in the 

horizontal position could interfere with 

the lumen output measurement. (GE, 

Public Meeting Transcript, No. 7 at pp. 

42–43; NEMA, No. 16 at p. 3; UL, Public 

Meeting Transcript, No. 7 at p. 54) DOE 

researched this concern by consulting 

with the Lighting Research Center 

(LRC), which has extensive lamp testing 

experience, and believes that testing 

lumen output in the horizontal position 

does not lead to significant 

measurement error when using the 

majority of sphere-spectroradiometer, 

sphere-photometer, and 

goniophotometer systems. For either a 

sphere-spectroradiometer or spherephotometer system, the bracket, which 

secures the lamp in place, can be 

designed and configured to eliminate 

any significant measurement error due 

to shadowing. For large 

goniophotometer systems, there would 

be sufficient space to make a bracket to 

hold the lamp in any orientation 

without risk of significant shadowing. It 

is possible that smaller goniophotometer 

systems could have mounting and 

bracket limitations that result in error 

when testing in the horizontal 

orientation due to shadowing. However, 

as discussed in section III.C.3.b, DOE 

proposes in the SNOPR to require all 

photometric measurements to be carried 

out in an integrating sphere and that 

goniometer systems must not be used. 

In the SNOPR, DOE proposes that 

LED lamps be positioned such that an 

equal number of units are oriented in 

the base-up and base-down orientations. 

This proposal specifies two commonly 

used orientations for LED lamps that 

span the highest and lowest light-output 

scenarios, creating a dataset that 

represents average performance in 

practice. These lamp mounting and 

orientation requirements would apply to 

lamps measured in both active mode 

and standby mode. DOE requests 

comment on the proposal for an equal 

number of lamps to be operated in the 

base-up and base-down orientations 

during lumen output, input power, CCT, 

and CRI testing. 

d. Electrical Settings 

In the NOPR, DOE proposed requiring 

testing of LED lamps at the rated voltage 

as specified in IES LM–79–2008. For 

lamps with multiple operating voltages, 

DOE proposed that lamps be tested at 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2

32026 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 106 / Tuesday, June 3, 2014 / Proposed Rules 

21 IEC/PAS 62717: LED modules for general 

lighting—Performance requirements. 

22Cheong, Kuan Yew. ‘‘LED Lighting Standards 

Update.’’ CREE, August 5, 2011. Page 31. 

www.nmc.a-star.edu.sg/LED_050811/Kuan_

CREE.pdf 

23Richman, Eric. ‘‘Understanding LED Tests: IES 

LM–79, LM–80, and TM–21.’’ DOE SSL Workshop, 

July 2011. Page 13. http://apps1.eere.energy.gov/

buildings/publications/pdfs/ssl/richman_tests_

sslmiw2011.pdf 

24 ‘‘Projecting Long Term Lumen Maintenance of 

LED Light Sources.’’ Approved by IES on July 25, 

2011. 

120 volts because 120 volts is the most 

common operating voltage of available 

lamps. However, if the lamp is not rated 

at 120 volts, DOE proposed that it be 

tested at the highest rated voltage. Id. 

NEMA disagreed with DOE’s proposal 

to test at rated voltage only, arguing the 

proposal was in conflict with FTC 

regulations that require testing lamps at 

120 volts and the rated voltage. (NEMA, 

No. 16 at p. 3) 

In this SNOPR, DOE maintains the 

NOPR proposal but, in addition, 

indicates that manufacturers may also 

test at other operating voltages as long 

as the final DOE test procedure is used 

for making energy representations. 

These electrical settings would apply to 

lamps measured in both active mode 

and standby mode. To ensure the 

SNOPR proposal is not in conflict with 

the FTC Lighting Facts label 

requirements, as was suggested by 

NEMA, DOE reviewed the FTC 

regulations detailed in 16 CFR 305.15. 

The FTC regulation states that a general 

service lamp shall be measured at 120 

volts, regardless of the lamp’s design or 

rated voltage. If a lamp’s design voltage 

is 125 volts or 130 volts, the disclosures 

of the wattage, light output, energy cost, 

and lifetime must disclose the voltage at 

which these metrics were measured. 

DOE’s proposal is not in conflict with 

FTC’s Lighting Facts requirements 

because manufacturers must test at 120 

volts as required by FTC and, if the LED 

lamp is rated for additional voltages, the 

lamp may also be tested at the highest 

rated voltage. This supports FTC’s 

program and does not provide 

conflicting instructions. 

In the NOPR, DOE proposed 

incorporating section 7.0 of IES LM–79– 

2008, which specifies electrical settings 

for LED lamps with multiple modes of 

operation, such as variable CCT and 

dimmable lamps. 77 FR at 21043. 

Section 7.0 of IES LM–79–2008 

indicates LED lamps with variable CCT 

shall be tested in each mode of 

operation, and for dimmable lamps, 

directs that they be tested at the 

maximum input power. 

Philips commented that when 

specifying electrical settings for variable 

CCT lamps it is important that DOE 

consider the scenario that the testing is 

intended to reflect (i.e., worst-case 

versus most common operating 

conditions) because lumen output can 

change based on the CCT mode. 

(Philips, Public Meeting Transcript, No. 

7 at p. 32) OSI agreed with this point 

and indicated that in the future it is 

foreseeable that LED lamps with 

variable CCT, CRI, and lumen output 

will be available. (OSI, Public Meeting 

Transcript, No. 7 at pp. 32–33) Both P.R. 

China and Samsung stated that LED 

lamps with multiple modes of operation 

are currently available. (P.R. China, No. 

12 at p. 4; Samsung, No. 14 at p. 1) GE 

and Samsung indicated that multiple 

mode lamps in the future could operate 

at continuously variable CCT making 

testing at a distinct CCT impossible. 

(GE, Public Meeting Transcript, No. 7 at 

p. 32; Samsung, No. 14 at p. 1) OSI 

commented that testing at the worstcase scenario could be a possible option 

for LED lamps with variable CCT, while 

Samsung suggested requiring both a 

best- and worst-case scenario. (OSI, 

Public Meeting Transcript, No. 7 at pp. 

33; Samsung, No. 14 at p. 1) P.R. China 

suggested DOE follow international 

standard IEC/PAS 62717–2011,21 which 

states that LED modules with adjustable 

color point must be adjusted/set to one 

fixed value as indicated by the 

manufacturer or responsible vendor. 

(P.R. China, No. 12 at p. 3) At the May 

3, 2012 NOPR public meeting (hereafter 

the May 2012 public meeting), NEMA 

argued against testing at a CCT, CRI, or 

lumen output setting that would rarely 

be used in the field. For lamps that can 

vary CCT over the power range, NEMA 

suggested testing the lamps only at the 

CCT that occurs at full power. (NEMA, 

Public Meeting Transcript, No. 7 at p. 

33; NEMA, No. 16 at p. 3) Finally, 

regarding dimming, NEMA agreed with 

DOE’s proposal to measure dimmable 

lamps at full power as this will reflect 

the rating on the packaging. (NEMA, No. 

16 at p. 3) 

DOE believes that LED lamps with 

multiple modes of operation, including 

variable CCT and CRI as well as 

dimmable lamps, should be tested at 

maximum input power because this is 

the highest energy consuming state. 

Therefore, DOE proposes to require 

testing for such lamps at the mode that 

occurs at maximum input power, since 

this is the highest energy consuming 

state. When multiple modes (such as 

multiple CCTs and CRIs) occur at the 

same maximum input power, the 

manufacturer can select any of these 

modes for testing. Manufacturers may 

also test at other modes as long as the 

final DOE test procedure is used for 

making representations about the energy 

consumption of an LED lamp. All 

measurements (lumen output, input 

power, efficacy, CCT, CRI, lifetime, and 

standby mode power) must be 

conducted at the same mode of 

operation. DOE invites comment on its 

proposals for testing lamps for which 

multiple modes (such as multiple CCTs 

and CRIs) can occur at the same 

maximum input power. 

4. Test Method 

a. Lamp Seasoning 

In the NOPR, DOE proposed requiring 

energizing and operating LED lamps for 

1,000 hours to season them before 

beginning photometric measurements. 

77 FR at 21043. DOE proposed a 1,000 

hour seasoning time because it has been 

indicated by industry 22 23 that light 

output of an LED source (and therefore, 

potentially the lamp) can change during 

the first 1,000 hours of operation. DOE 

also noted that IES TM–21–2011 24

specifies that the data obtained from the 

first 1,000 hours of operating an LED 

source shall not be used to project the 

lifetime of an LED source. 

Cree, Philips, Feit Electric Company, 

NEMA, P.R. China, the Joint Comment, 

CA IOUs, Northwest Energy Efficiency 

Alliance (hereafter referred to as NEEA), 

and South Korea all commented that 

LED lamps not be seasoned for 1,000 

hours prior to collecting lumen output 

data. They argued that due to the 

evolving nature of these products, there 

is no common seasoning time. (Cree, 

Public Meeting Transcript, No. 7 at pp. 

34–35; Philips, Public Meeting 

Transcript, No. 7 at p. 35, 36; Feit, 

Public Meeting Transcript, No. 7 at p. 

45; NEMA, Public Meeting Transcript, 

No. 7 at p. 36; P.R. China, No. 12 at p. 

4; NEMA, No. 16 at p. 3; Joint Comment, 

No. 18 at pp. 5–6; CA IOUs, No. 19 at 

p. 5; NEEA, No. 20 at p. 2; South Korea, 

No. 17 at p. 2) Cree indicated that 

sudden increases or decreases in light 

output in the first 1,000 hours of 

operation depend on several factors in 

the construction of the LED lamp. (Cree, 

Public Meeting Transcript, No. 7 at pp. 

36–37) P.R. China, NEEA, and the CA 

IOUs stated that DOE should remain 

consistent with the specifications of IES 

LM–79–2008, and require no seasoning 

prior to photometric measurements. 

(P.R. China, No. 12 at p. 4; NEEA, No. 

20 at p. 2; CA IOUs, No. 19 at p. 5) 

The Joint Comment indicated that 

when taking photometric 

measurements, it is not obvious if 

seasoning is necessary. They suggested 

that DOE investigate and report on the 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2

Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 106 / Tuesday, June 3, 2014 / Proposed Rules 32027 

25 IES LM–79–2008 defines preburning as the 

operation of a light source prior to mounting on a 

measurement instrument, to shorten the required 

stabilization time on the instrument. 

26 Directional lamps are designed to provide more 

intense light to a particular region or solid angle. 

Light provided outside that region is less useful to 

the consumer, as directional lamps are typically 

used to provide contrasting illumination relative to 

the background or ambient light. 

27Please refer to the NOPR Test Procedures for 

Light-Emitting Diode Lamps (Docket No. EERE– 

2011–BT–TP–0071) for a detailed explanation of 

why DOE is not proposing to measure beam lumens 

for directional LED lamps (77 FR at 21043; April 9, 

2012). 

28 ‘‘Energy Star Program Requirements for Integral 

LED Lamps: Eligibility Criteria—Version 1.4.’’ U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency, August 28, 2013. 

necessity of seasoning lamps prior to 

photometric measurements, as this 

seasoning is in direct conflict with 

procedures established in IES LM–79– 

2008. Should DOE decide that there is 

sufficient variability in devices that can 

be mitigated by seasoning; they 

recommend that DOE collaborate with 

industry to minimize testing burden and 

potential re-testing of current LED 

sources/lamps. (Joint Comment, No. 18 

at pp. 5–6) The National Institute of 

Standards and Technology (hereafter 

referred to as NIST) and Samsung, 

however, commented that seasoning 

LED lamps for 1,000 hours prior to 

collecting lumen output data is 

reasonable. (NIST, Public Meeting 

Transcript, No. 7 at p. 47; Samsung, No. 

14 at p. 1) NIST argued that including 

a seasoning time of 1,000 hours would 

help identify faulty products. (NIST, 

Public Meeting Transcript, No. 7 at p. 

47) 

In the SNOPR, DOE proposes to 

eliminate the requirement to season 

lamps for 1,000 hours prior to taking 

photometric measurements. Although 

some LED lamps do experience changes 

in light output during the first 1,000 

hours of operation, independent 

research and manufacturer comments 

indicate that this is not true for all LED 

lamps. Each LED lamp is unique, and as 

a result, initial trends in light output are 

not consistent from lamp to lamp. 

Therefore, seasoning all lamps for a 

predetermined duration does not 

provide a more accurate initial test 

measurement, though it does increase 

testing burden. The current industryaccepted test procedure, IES–79–2008, 

reflects this understanding by not 

allowing lamp seasoning. Therefore, the 

SNOPR proposes to remain consistent 

with section 4.0 of IES LM–79–2008, 

which indicates LED lamps shall not be 

seasoned before beginning photometric 

measurements. These seasoning 

requirements would apply to lamps 

measured in both active mode and 

standby mode. DOE requests comment 

on this proposal. 

b. Lamp Stabilization 

In the NOPR, DOE proposed 

stabilizing lamps for the time specified 

in section 5.0 of IES LM–79–2008. DOE 

further proposed that stability of the 

LED lamp is reached when the variation 

[(maximum—minimum)/minimum] of 

at least three readings of light output 

and electrical power over a period of 30 

minutes, taken 15 minutes apart, is less 

than 0.5 percent. 77 FR at 21043. This 

calculation was included to add 

clarification to the method specified in 

section 5.0 of IES LM–79–2008. For 

stabilization of a number of products of 

the same model, section 5.0 of IES LM– 

79–2008 suggests that preburning 25 of 

the product may be used if it has been 

established that the method produces 

the same stabilized condition as when 

using the standard method described 

above. 

NEMA agreed that the lamp 

stabilization method in IES LM–79– 

2008 be used for the LED lamp test 

procedure but argued that the standard 

did not need further clarification. 

(NEMA, Public Meeting Transcript, No. 

7 at pp. 38–39; NEMA, No. 16 at p. 3) 

However, GE advocated for presenting 

the lamp stabilization equation as a 

percent. (GE, Public Meeting Transcript, 

No. 7 at p. 39) 

DOE reconsidered its NOPR proposal, 

but came to the same conclusion for the 

SNOPR. IES LM–79–2008 does not 

clearly specify the calculation for 

determining the stabilization value, 

leaving this requirement open to 

interpretation. Therefore, DOE 

continues to propose in the SNOPR that 

variation of at least three readings of 

light output and electrical power over a 

period of 30 minutes, taken 15 minutes 

apart is calculated as [maximum— 

minimum]/minimum. DOE expects this 

proposal is the same or very similar to 

the stabilization calculation methods 

already used in practice. As in the 

NOPR, DOE continues to propose in this 

SNOPR that stabilization of multiple 

products of the same model can be 

carried out as specified in section 5.0 of 

IES LM–79–2008. These stabilization 

requirements would apply to lamps 

measured in both active mode and 

standby mode. 

c. Lumen Output Metric 

In the NOPR, DOE proposed that the 

test method for measuring the lumen 

output of an LED lamp be as specified 

in section 9.0 of IES LM–79–2008 and 

proposed the same lumen output 

measurement method for all LED lamps, 

including directional 26 LED lamps. Id. 

For directional LED lamps, DOE 

suggested measuring total lumen output 

from the lamp rather than beam 

lumens 27 because other directional 

lamp technologies currently measure 

and report total lumen output on the 

FTC Lighting Facts label. 

As discussed in section III.C.3.b, DOE 

proposes in the SNOPR that 

goniometers may not be used for 

photometric measurements. As a result, 

DOE proposes that the method for 

measuring lumen output in the SNOPR 

be as specified in sections 9.1 and 9.2 

of IES LM–79–2008. Section 9.3 of IES 

LM–79–2008 discusses usage of 

goniometers, and DOE is not including 

that method in the SNOPR proposal. 

Regarding directional lamps, NEMA 

commented that industry has not yet 

reached consensus regarding a light 

output metric for directional lamps. 

(NEMA, Public Meeting Transcript, No. 

7 at p. 43; NEMA, No. 16 at p. 4) 

Furthermore, NEMA highlighted that 

DOE has other rulemakings specifically 

for reflector lamps that specify the use 

of total lumens. Therefore, a deviation 

from measuring total lumens in the LED 

lamp test procedure would have a 

significant impact on all types of 

directional lamps. (NEMA, Public 

Meeting Transcript, No. 7 at p. 44) The 

CA IOUs commented that if measuring 

beam lumens is only required for the 

LED lamp test procedure and not all 

general service reflector lamps, this 

could hinder the industry’s ability to 

compare lamps across technologies. (CA 

IOUs, No. 19 at p. 7) However, the CA 

IOUs supported DOE’s efforts to develop 

a beam efficacy metric and 

recommended that this metric be 

applied to all directional lamp 

technologies. (CA IOUs, No. 19 at p. 7) 

In contrast, P.R. China argued that 

testing total lumen output instead of the 

beam lumen output and center-beam 

candle power might bring inconsistency 

and confusion to the industry. 

Therefore, they recommended that DOE 

reference the Energy Star Program 

Requirements for Integral LED Lamps: 

Eligibility Criteria—Version 1.4 28

which specifies that the center-beam 

candle power and beam angle be tested 

for directional lamps. (P.R. China, No. 

12 at p. 4) 

Because total lumen output is the 

measurement reported on the FTC 

Lighting Facts label for other directional 

lamp technologies, DOE agrees with 

NEMA and the CA IOUs comments not 

to include measurements for beam 

lumens in this test procedure. 

Therefore, DOE maintains its proposal 

from the NOPR to measure the total 

lumen output for LED lamps. Measuring 

the total lumen output for LED lamps 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2

32028 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 106 / Tuesday, June 3, 2014 / Proposed Rules 

29 ‘‘Method of Measuring and Specifying Colour 

Rendering Properties of Light Sources.’’ Approved 

by CIE in 1995. 

30 In the NOPR, DOE used the term ‘‘rated 

lifetime.’’ For the SNOPR, DOE replaces the term 

‘‘rated lifetime’’ with ‘‘lifetime’’ to refer to the same 

parameter. 

31U.S. Department of Energy, ‘‘LED Luminaire 

Lifetime: Recommendation for Testing and 

Reporting,’’ June 2011. http://

apps1.eere.energy.gov/buildings/publications/pdfs/

ssl/led_luminaire-lifetime-guide_june2011.pdf. 

will enable industry and consumers to 

compare general service lamp products 

across different technologies. 

d. Input Power 

Following seasoning and stabilization, 

input power to the LED lamp is 

measured using the instrumentation 

specified in section III.C.3.b. All test 

conditions and test setup requirements 

from sections III.C.2 and III.C.3 should 

also be followed. 

e. Lamp Efficacy Metric 

In the NOPR, DOE proposed test 

procedures for measuring lumen output 

and input power, and also specified 

testing dimmable lamps at full light 

output. 77 FR at 21041. However, 

commenters noted that efficacy may 

appear in future mandates, and 

therefore recommended it be included 

in DOE’s test procedure for LED lamps. 

The CA IOUs commented that a test 

procedure with an efficacy metric 

would be needed in the future to 

comply with federal legislative 

mandates, and for this reason they urged 

DOE to include an efficacy metric in the 

test procedure. Both the CA IOUs and 

NEEA recommended that DOE adopt 

IES LM–79–2008, which defines 

luminous efficacy as the quotient of the 

measured total luminous flux (in 

lumens) and the measured electrical 

input power (in watts), or lumens per 

watt. (CA IOUs, No. 19 at p. 3; NEEA, 

No. 20 at p. 1) 

As discussed in section I, this 

proposed test procedure will support 

any potential future energy conservation 

standards for general service LED lamps, 

which may include efficacy as a metric 

for setting standards. Accordingly, for 

the SNOPR, DOE proposes that the 

efficacy of an LED lamp be calculated by 

dividing measured initial lamp lumen 

output in lumens by the measured lamp 

input power in watts, in units of lumens 

per watt. DOE believes that providing a 

calculation for efficacy of an LED lamp 

does not increase testing burden 

because the test procedure already 

includes metrics for input power and 

lumen output. DOE requests comment 

on the proposal to add a calculation for 

efficacy of an LED lamp. 

f. Measuring Correlated Color 

Temperature 

In the NOPR, DOE proposed that the 

CCT of an LED lamp be calculated as 

specified in section 12.4 of IES LM–79– 

2008. 77 FR at 21044. The CCT is 

determined by measuring the relative 

spectral distribution, calculating the 

chromaticity coordinates, and then 

matching the chromaticity coordinates 

to a particular CCT of the Planckian 

radiator. The setup for measuring the 

relative spectral distribution, which is 

required to calculate the CCT of the LED 

lamp, shall be as specified in section 

12.0 of IES LM–79–2008. That section 

describes the test method to calculate 

CCT using a sphere-spectroradiometer 

system and a spectroradiometer or 

colorimeter system. Section 12.0 of IES 

LM–79–2008 also specifies the 

spectroradiometer parameters that affect 

CCT and the method to evaluate spatial 

non-uniformity of chromaticity. 

South Korea disagreed with the 

proposal in the NOPR and 

recommended that DOE follow industry 

standard IEC/PAS 62612 which states 

that nominal CCT values shall be 

reported (South Korea, No. 17 at pp. 3– 

4). Nominal CCT values are defined by 

a region of the chromaticity diagram and 

any lamp that falls in a certain region is 

assigned a single CCT value. However, 

nominal CCT values do not address all 

regions of the chromaticity diagram. 

Although manufacturers in the 

marketplace may choose to design 

lamps that fall within regions defined 

by nominal CCT, DOE’s goal is to 

establish one test method that applies to 

all LED lamps. Therefore, DOE is not 

proposing to follow a nominal CCT 

methodology and maintains its proposal 

in the NOPR regarding the method to 

calculate the CCT of an LED lamp. 

Furthermore, as discussed in section 

III.C.3.b, DOE also proposes in the 

SNOPR to require all photometric 

measurements (including CCT) be 

carried out in an integrating sphere, and 

that goniometer systems must not be 

used. Therefore, DOE proposes that the 

instrumentation used for CCT 

measurements be as described in section 

12.0 of IES LM–79–2008 with the 

exclusion of section 12.2 of IES LM–79– 

2008. 

g. Measuring Color Rendering Index 

In the SNOPR, DOE proposes to add 

a requirement that the CRI of an LED 

lamp be determined as specified in 

section 12.4 of IES LM–79–2008. As 

discussed in section III.C.3.b, DOE also 

proposes in the SNOPR to require all 

photometric measurements (including 

CRI) be carried out in an integrating 

sphere. Therefore, the setup for 

measuring the relative spectral 

distribution, which is required to 

calculate the CRI of the LED lamp, must 

be as specified in section 12.0 of IES 

LM–79–2008 with the exclusion of 

section 12.2 of IES LM–79–2008, as 

goniometer systems must not be used. 

Section 12.4 of IES LM–79–2008 also 

specifies that CRI be calculated 

according to the method defined in the 

International Commission on 

Illumination (CIE) 13.3–1995.29 DOE 

proposes that the test procedure for LED 

lamps include measurement methods 

for CRI in order to support the 

upcoming general service lamps energy 

conservation standard rulemaking. DOE 

requests comment on the proposal to 

add CRI to the test procedure for LED 

lamps. 

D. Proposed Approach for Lifetime 

Measurements 

1. LED Lamp Lifetime Definition 

There are currently no industry 

standards that define or provide 

instructions for measuring the 

lifetime 30 of LED lamps. Thus, for the 

NOPR, DOE conducted literature 

research and interviewed several subject 

matter experts to understand how 

industry characterized lifetime for these 

products. Based on the information 

gathered, DOE proposed to measure 

lumen maintenance to determine the 

lifetime of LED lamps. Although other 

lighting technologies define lamp 

lifetime as the time at which 50 percent 

of tested samples stop producing light, 

industry believes that an LED lamp has 

reached the end of its useful life when 

it achieves a lumen maintenance of 70 

percent (i.e. 70 percent of initial lumen 

output, or L70). 77 FR at 21046. 

Philips, OSI, and Cree agreed that 

currently no industry accepted 

procedure exists for measuring the 

lifetime of LED-based lighting products. 

(Philips, Public Meeting Transcript, No. 

7 at p. 64; OSI, Public Meeting 

Transcript, No. 7 at pp. 74–75; Cree, 

Public Meeting Transcript, No. 7 at p. 

65) However, Litecontrol and NEMA 

disagreed with DOE’s proposal, stating 

that the report LED Luminaire Lifetime: 

Recommendation for Testing and 

Reporting 31 explicitly argues that lumen 

maintenance alone cannot be used as a 

proxy for the lifetime of LED-based 

lighting products. (Litecontrol, No. 11 at 

p. 1; NEMA, No. 16 at p. 5) Radcliffe 

Advisors and the CA IOUs emphasized 

that color shift be considered when 

determining the lifetime because this 

could also render a lamp un-usable or 

undesirable to a consumer before the 

lamp reaches L70. (Radcliffe Advisors, 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2

Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 106 / Tuesday, June 3, 2014 / Proposed Rules 32029 

32 ‘‘Measuring Lumen Maintenance of LED Light 

Sources.’’ Approved by IES on September 22, 2008. 

33LM–84 ‘‘IES Approved Method for Measuring 

Lumen and Color Maintenance LED Lamps, 

Lighting engines, and Luminaires,’’ will provide the 

method for measurement of lumen and color 

maintenance of LED lamps, light engines, and LED 

luminaires. 

34TM–26 ‘‘Projecting Long-Term Lumen 

Maintenance for LED Lamps and Luminaires,’’ will 

provide an LED lamp and luminaire level 

counterpart to IES TM–21–2011 using the IES LM– 

80–2008 (revision) and LM–84 testing data for 

projecting long-term lumen maintenance. 

No. 13 at p. 1; CA IOUs, No. 19 at p. 

4) 

In the absence of industry consensus 

regarding a definition or test procedure 

for lifetime, NEMA, Lutron, the CA 

IOUs, and Radcliffe Advisors 

emphasized that DOE should wait for 

industry to develop new and revised 

standards that address lifetime and then 

reference them for the purposes of the 

FTC Lighting Facts label. (NEMA, No. 

16 at p. 2; Lutron, Public Meeting 

Transcript, No. 7 at p. 80; CA IOUs, No. 

19 at p. 5; Radcliffe Advisors, No. 13 at 

p. 1) NEMA indicated that this includes 

revisions of IES LM–79–2008, IES LM– 

80–2008,32 and emerging standards IES 

LM–84 33 and IES TM–26.34 (NEMA, No. 

16 at p. 2, 5, 7) The Joint Comment, 

NEMA, NEEA, and the CA IOUs 

encouraged DOE to work with industry 

to develop a test procedure that would 

quantify the lifetime of an LED lamp 

system. (Joint Comment, No. 18 at p. 1; 

NEMA, No. 16 at p. 4; NEEA, No. 20 at 

pp. 2–3; CA IOUs, No. 19 at p. 5) 

NEMA, Philips, and Radcliffe Advisors 

pointed out that there are several 

industry groups working on this issue, 

such as the LED Systems Reliability 

Consortium. (NEMA, No. 16 at p. 4; 

Philips, Public Meeting Transcript, No. 

7 at p. 64; Radcliffe Advisors, No. 13 at 

p. 1) Other interested parties cited 

additional efforts; the CA IOUs 

commented that DOE should coordinate 

efforts with ENERGY STAR while the 

Joint Comment recommended that DOE 

coordinate test procedure development 

with work in the European Union. (CA 

IOUs, No. 19 at p. 5; Joint Comment, No. 

18 at p. 5) 

DOE recognizes that there are 

degradation mechanisms other than 

lumen maintenance, such as color shift, 

that can affect the useful lifetime of LED 

lamps. However, color shift is not very 

well-understood, well-studied, or 

commonly used even for traditional 

incandescent lamps and CFLs.31 After 

conducting thorough research of 

existing test procedures for all lighting 

products and industry literature 

regarding LED lamp lifetime, DOE has 

tentatively concluded that there is no 

industry consensus for how to 

characterize lifetime of LED lamps in 

terms of performance metrics other than 

lumen maintenance. Therefore, DOE is 

not proposing to use metrics such as 

color shift to determine the lifetime of 

LED lamps. 

Although industry may be working to 

develop new and revised standards to 

define lifetime and establish test 

procedures for measuring this quantity, 

the timeframe for their development is 

unknown. DOE reviewed the efforts of 

other working groups, as suggested by 

interested parties, but was unable to 

find any U.S. or international standard 

that provides a test procedure for 

measuring and/or projecting LED lamp 

lifetime. The only publicly available 

approach for measuring LED lamp 

lifetime is ENERGY STAR Program 

Requirements for Lamps (Light Bulbs): 

Eligibility Criteria—Version 1.0,10

which uses a lumen maintenance of 70 

percent (i.e. 70 percent of initial lumen 

output, or L70) as an estimate for 

lifetime. Therefore, in this SNOPR, DOE 

proposes to continue to define lifetime 

as the time at which the lumen output 

of the LED lamp falls below 70 percent 

of the initial lumen output. 

2. NOPR Proposals 

As mentioned above, there are 

currently no industry standards that 

address how to measure lifetime for LED 

lamps. Therefore, DOE reviewed 

methods to measure lifetime that were 

contained in industry standards for 

related components and also 

investigated recent efforts in DOE and 

ENERGY STAR working groups. In the 

NOPR, DOE presented four potential 

lifetime measurement approaches, all of 

which characterized the lifetime of LED 

lamps as the time required to reach a 

lumen maintenance of 70 percent. 77 FR 

at 21044–5. Three of these approaches 

tested an LED lamp to determine the 

lifetime and the fourth approach tested 

the LED source as a proxy for the 

lifetime of the lamp. Ultimately, DOE 

determines in this SNOPR that the test 

procedure for lifetime must directly 

measure the performance of an LED 

lamp and not the LED source, and 

proposes the revised lifetime 

measurement detailed in section III.D.3. 

Approach 1, based largely on the 

procedures in IES LM–79–2008, 

directed manufacturers to measure the 

lumen output of the LED lamp until it 

reaches 70 percent of its initial lumen 

output. In the NOPR, DOE stated that 

Approach 1 is advantageous because it 

does not project the time at which the 

lamp reaches L70 and therefore measures 

the actual performance of the lamp over 

its useful life. However, DOE 

determined that Approach 1 was not 

practical because it may require up to 

six years of testing, by which time the 

LED lamp may be obsolete. Id. 

Approach 2 called for measuring 

lumen output of the LED lamp for a 

specified period of time, 6,000 hours, 

and then projecting the time at which 

the lamp reached L70 based on the 

minimum lumen maintenance at 6,000 

hours. This method was largely based 

on the ENERGY STAR Specification for 

Integral LED Lamps Version 1.4 (see 

supra note 28). In addition, DOE 

proposed in the NOPR that a rapid-cycle 

stress test be performed to assess 

catastrophic lamp failure (e.g. when a 

lamp immediately ceases to emit light, 

rather than gradually decreasing in light 

output). Approach 2 also enabled 

lifetime claims to be based on the 

performance of an LED lamp, but was 

less time consuming than Approach 1 

because it only required 6,000 hours of 

testing and then projected the lifetime 

based on the lumen maintenance at 

6,000 hours. However, DOE noted in the 

NOPR that the method used to develop 

the ENERGY STAR lifetime projection is 

unverified and purely theoretical. 

Furthermore, Approach 2 did not 

account for catastrophic lamp failure 

beyond the 6,000 hour testing time. Id. 

Similar to Approach 2, Approach 3, 

based on IES LM–79–2008, directed 

measuring the lumen output of the LED 

lamp for a minimum of 6,000 hours. In 

the NOPR, DOE stated that the collected 

lumen output data would then be used 

to project the L70 lifetime of the LED 

lamp using an alternative procedure that 

would be developed by DOE. This 

method would project lifetime based on 

the performance of an LED lamp, but 

would not necessarily be based on a 

standardized method for projecting 

lifetime. 77 FR at 21045. 

Finally, Approach 4 required 

measuring the lumen output of LED 

sources (the component of the LED lamp 

that produces light) at regular intervals 

for a minimum of 6,000 hours, based 

largely on the procedures in IES LM– 

80–2008. DOE would then project the 

time at which the lumen output of the 

source reached 70 percent of its initial 

lumen output using the projection 

method in IES TM–21–2011. In the 

NOPR, DOE indicated that, although the 

preferred methodology is to project the 

lifetime of an LED lamp rather than an 

LED source, an industry standardized 

method only exists for projecting the 

lifetime of an LED source and not an 

LED lamp. For this reason, DOE 

tentatively concluded in the NOPR that 

Approach 4 was the most appropriate 

and proposed that this method be used 

for estimating the lifetime of an LED 

lamp. Id. 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2

32030 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 106 / Tuesday, June 3, 2014 / Proposed Rules 

35Society of Reliability Engineers, Reliability 

Prediction of Electronic Equipment, December 

1991. http://www.sre.org/pubs/Mil-Hdbk-217F.pdf. 

DOE received many comments 

regarding its proposal for measuring 

lifetime. Both Kritzer and Samsung 

agreed with NOPR Approach 4, as 

written, for measuring the lifetime of 

LED lamps. (Kritzer, No. 3 at p. 1, 

Samsung, No. 14 at p. 1) Kritzer 

commented that it would be expected 

that the proposed method would reduce 

the amount of time needed for testing 

LED lamps and hence also reduce costs. 

(Kritzer, No. 3 at p. 1) However, NEMA, 

Radcliffe Advisors, and the Joint 

Comment disagreed with all suggested 

approaches within the NOPR document, 

including Approaches 1, 2, and 3 which 

DOE did not adopt as its proposal. 

(NEMA, No. 16 at p. 4; Radcliffe 

Advisors, No. 13 at p. 1; Joint Comment, 

No. 18 at p. 1) 

Despite their disagreement, NEMA 

did offer an interim solution to use until 

new and revised industry standards are 

released. Their proposal combined 

NOPR Approach 2 and 4. They 

indicated that NOPR Approach 2 could 

be used by those manufacturers who do 

not have IES LM–80–2008 data for the 

LED source within the lamp and that 

NOPR Approach 4 could be used for 

those products for which IES LM–80– 

2008 data does exist. (NEMA, No. 16 at 

p. 4, 8) In addition, they suggested that 

DOE not include the rapid cycle stress 

testing suggested in Approach 2. They 

indicated that rapid cycle stress testing 

is practiced for some lighting 

technologies; however, this technique is 

not widely practiced by the LED 

industry and has not been verified as 

relevant to LED lifetime and 

performance. (NEMA, No. 16 at p. 9) 

DOE appreciates NEMA’s interim 

proposal, but notes that combining 

Approaches 2 and 4 would result in 

some manufacturers reporting lifetime 

based on testing of an LED lamp and 

others reporting lifetime based on 

testing of an LED source. The 

differences between Approaches 2 and 4 

would lead to different results for 

lifetime. DOE cannot adopt alternative 

test methods that yield different results 

as there would be no basis for 

establishing any future energy 

conservation standards. Furthermore, 

this combined approach still contains 

many of the drawbacks related to the 

individual approaches. 

Regarding Approach 4, DOE received 

several comments that outlined the 

disadvantages of the NOPR proposal for 

determining the lifetime of LED lamps. 

NEMA, Philips, OSI, TUD, the Joint 

Comment, the CA IOUs, NEEA, 

Radcliffe Advisors, the Appliance 

Standards Awareness Project (hereafter 

referred to as ASAP), and Litecontrol 

advocated basing the lifetime on 

measurements of the whole LED lamp 

and not the LED source component. 

They commented that it is undesirable 

for the lifetime of LED lamps to be 

approximated by the lumen 

maintenance of the LED source and 

stated that other components may cause 

lamp failure before the LED source falls 

below 70 percent of its initial light 

output. (NEMA, Public Meeting 

Transcript, No. 7 at p. 83, 84–85, 85; 

NEMA, No. 16 at p. 2, 4, 5, 8, 9; Philips, 

Public Meeting Transcript, No. 7 at pp. 

63–64, 83; OSI, Public Meeting 

Transcript, No. 7 at p. 69, 100–101; 

TUD, No. 15 at p. 1; Joint Comment, No. 

18 at p. 1, 2, 4; CA IOUs, No. 19 at p. 

4; NEEA, No. 20 at p. 2, 3; Radcliffe 

Advisors, No. 13 at p. 1; ASAP, Public 

Meeting Transcript, No. 7 at pp. 83–84; 

Litecontrol, No. 11 at p. 1) 

Some interested parties suggested 

additional considerations for a 

procedure that measured the 

performance of an LED lamp rather than 

an LED source. The Joint Comment 

stated that the test procedure for LED 

lamp lifetime include measurements 

and projections of driver lifetime. They 

explained that industry has developed 

reliability models to predict theoretical 

failure rates of LED drivers, and DOE 

should investigate these models to 

determine if using them would help 

better capture system effects of an LED 

lamp. (Joint Comment, No. 18 at p. 1, 4– 

5) The CA IOUs also suggested that DOE 

use accelerated testing based on 

elevated temperatures, such as the 

method being explored by the LRC. (CA 

IOUs, No. 19 at p. 5) 

DOE has considered all comments 

received about the four approaches 

discussed in the NOPR and has decided 

to significantly change its approach for 

determining the lifetime of LED lamps 

in this SNOPR. DOE agrees that there 

are several potential issues with 

requiring lumen maintenance testing of 

the LED source component, as proposed 

in Approach 4. DOE has preliminarily 

concluded in this SNOPR that the test 

procedure for lifetime must directly 

measure the performance of an LED 

lamp. DOE acknowledges that LED 

driver degradation and interactions 

between the LED sources and other 

components are known to affect the 

lifetime of integrated LED lamps. 

Regarding the proposal by the Joint 

Comment, DOE conducted research of 

existing driver reliability modeling and 

test procedures, including those 

specified in the military handbook MIL– 

HDBK–217F,35 to determine whether 

driver failure could be included in the 

projection of LED lamp lifetime. 

However, DOE determined that no test 

procedures are available that use the 

expected failure of the LED driver to 

predict the failure of the complete LED 

lamp system. The CA IOUs suggested 

that DOE consider accelerated testing 

based on elevated temperatures for the 

lifetime test procedure. However, DOE 

research of existing literature and 

industry test procedures indicates that 

accelerated test methods for LED lamp 

lifetime are not available, and therefore, 

are not ready for inclusion in the 

SNOPR. 

As mentioned above, DOE has 

decided to measure directly the 

performance of an LED lamp and does 

not propose requiring testing of LED 

sources or any individual lamp 

component. The complete SNOPR 

method is described in section III.D.3. 

Although DOE has decided to make this 

change, DOE did receive comments on 

specific aspects of the NOPR proposal. 

These comments are discussed in 

further detail below. 

a. Industry Standards 

In the NOPR, DOE proposed 

measuring the lumen output of LED 

sources based on IES LM–80–2008 and 

then projecting the time at which the 

lumen output of the source reached 70 

percent of the initial lumen output 

based on IES TM–21–2011. 77 FR at 

21045 NEMA, Cree, Radcliffe Advisors, 

the CA IOUs, and Philips commented 

that the NOPR proposal modifies and 

misapplies industry standards, and 

argued that both IES LM–80–2008 and 

IES TM–21–2011 provide procedures to 

measure lumen maintenance of the LED 

source and should not be used to 

estimate the lifetime of LED lamps. 

(NEMA, No. 16 at p. 2, 5, 7; Cree, Public 

Meeting Transcript, No. 7 at pp. 95–96, 

109; Radcliffe Advisors, No. 13 at p. 1; 

CA IOUs, No. 19 at p. 5, 6; Philips, 

Public Meeting Transcript, No. 7 at p. 

114) NEMA specified that DOE only 

reference IES LM–79–2008 because this 

standard applies to LED lamps, which 

are the subject of this rulemaking. 

(NEMA, No. 16 at p. 6) 

DOE understands that both IES LM– 

80–2008 and IES TM–21–2011 are 

industry standards for measuring and 

predicting the lumen maintenance of an 

LED source. In the NOPR, DOE 

proposed referencing these standards to 

measure the lumen maintenance of an 

LED source because DOE believed it 

would be an adequate approximation for 

determining the lifetime of LED lamps. 

However, based on the comments 

received in response to the NOPR, DOE 

has changed its proposed procedure to 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2

Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 106 / Tuesday, June 3, 2014 / Proposed Rules 32031 

36 ‘‘Self-Ballasted Lamps and Lamp Adapters.’’ 

Published by UL on August 28, 2009. 

37ENERGY STAR Program Guidance Regarding 

LED Package, LED Array and LED Module Lumen 

Maintenance Performance Data Supporting 

Qualification of Lighting Products, September 9, 

2011. www.energystar.gov/ia/partners/prod_

development/new_specs/downloads/luminaires/

ENERGY_STAR_Final_Lumen_Maintenance_

Guidance.pdf. 

measure the lifetime of LED lamps. In 

this SNOPR, DOE proposes assessing 

the lumen maintenance of an LED lamp 

and does not require testing of LED 

sources. DOE’s lifetime proposal, 

described in section III.D.3, uses the 

procedures of IES LM–79–2008 to 

measure the lumen output of an LED 

lamp. 

b. LED Source In-Situ Temperature 

In the NOPR, DOE proposed 

performing an in-situ temperature 

measurement test (ISTMT) to determine 

the case temperature at which the 

lumen maintenance data shall be 

obtained to project the lifetime of the 

LED source. 77 FR at 21047 DOE 

proposed that the test setup, conditions, 

test equipment, instrumentation, and 

test box material and construction for 

the ISTMT be as specified in UL 1993– 

2009.36 UL, GE, Cree, NEMA, and Feit 

argued that the test setup specified in 

UL 1993–2009 is designed to represent 

a worst-case installation scenario. (UL, 

Public Meeting Transcript, No. 7 at p. 

110; GE, Public Meeting Transcript, No. 

7 at p. 91; Cree, Public Meeting 

Transcript, No. 7 at p. 93; NEMA, No. 

16 at p. 5; Feit, Public Meeting 

Transcript, No. 7 at p. 93) Specifically, 

NEMA expressed concern that the test 

setup described in UL 1993–2009 would 

elevate the ambient air to a temperature 

greater than 25 °C, which conflicts with 

the requirement to measure photometric 

characteristics at 25 °C. This increase in 

temperature could also lead to changes 

in the photometric performance of the 

LED sources. Furthermore, NEMA 

commented that using UL 1993–2009 

would force LED lamp manufacturers to 

increase design margins for lumens and 

other lamp characteristics to account for 

the temperature increase of the UL test 

conditions. This would lead to the overdesign of LED lamps. (NEMA, No. 16 at 

p. 7) GE and NEMA concluded that UL 

1993–2009 should not be used as part of 

the instruction for the ISTMT. (GE, 

Public Meeting Transcript, No. 7 at p. 

91; NEMA, No. 16 at p. 5, 7) The Joint 

Comment indicated that DOE should 

carefully consider whether UL 1993– 

2009 represents an average installation 

or a worst-case scenario. (Joint 

Comment, No. 18 at p. 3) However, 

Intertek argued that UL 1993–2009 is 

designed to represent typical 

installation conditions. (Intertek, Public 

Meeting Transcript, No. 7 at p. 92, 93). 

The Joint Comment explained that 

temperature plays a critical role in the 

failure of LED lamps. They commented 

that an appropriate lifetime test method 

would take careful account of all the 

real-world installation parameters that 

could impact the natural operating 

temperature of the device. The Joint 

Comment indicated that this would 

include orientation, natural air 

circulation around the device, and all 

the effects from other physical 

connections/thermal pathways. In 

contrast with the manufacturers’ 

recommendation, the Joint Comment 

supported a test procedure that 

approximates a worst-case installation 

scenario if knowledge about field 

installations is missing or insufficient. 

(Joint Comment, No. 18 at p. 2–3) The 

Joint Comment recommended that DOE 

carefully consider whether UL 1993– 

2009 represents an average U.S. 

installation or a worst-case scenario and 

provide justification as to why its use is 

appropriate. (Joint Comment, No. 18 at 

p. 3) 

In this SNOPR, DOE has proposed a 

new test procedure for measuring the 

lifetime of LED lamps that does not 

require determining the in-situ 

temperature of the LED source. The test 

conditions for the new proposal are 

discussed in section III.D.3.b. 

c. LED Source Lumen Maintenance 

IES LM–80–2008 requires 

manufacturers to test LED sources at 

three temperatures: 55 °C, 85 °C, and a 

third temperature suggested by the 

source manufacturer. A lamp 

manufacturer can then interpolate the 

performance of the source at any 

temperature bounded by those three 

temperatures, avoiding the need to 

conduct additional LED source testing 

for their specific LED lamp. However, 

IES LM–80–2008 does not provide a 

method for extrapolating LED source 

performance at an in-situ temperature 

that is not bounded by those three 

temperatures. In this case (an 

uncommon situation), DOE proposed in 

the NOPR that LED lamp manufacturers 

would need to test the LED sources at 

the in-situ temperature of their lamp to 

obtain the lumen maintenance data to 

project the lifetime. 77 FR at 21046 

DOE’s NOPR proposal did not modify 

IES LM–80–2008, instead it provided 

additional test methods for situations 

outside the applicability of IES LM–80– 

2008. 

DOE received several comments 

requesting that DOE not modify IES 

LM–80–2008 and stating that proposed 

testing of LED sources would be costly. 

NEMA, the CA IOUs, and NEEA 

commented that DOE should not modify 

the test procedures specified in IES LM– 

80–2008. (NEMA, No. 16 at p. 5; CA 

IOUs, No. 19 at pp. 5–6; NEEA, No. 20 

at p. 2). Furthermore, NEEA commented 

that aligning DOE’s test procedure and 

IES LM–80–2008 will reduce the testing 

burden on manufacturers. (NEEA, No. 

20 at p. 2) The CA IOUs elaborated that 

LED source testing at the case 

temperature identified during the 

ISTMT would be impractical and/or 

costly for industry because LED sources 

are often brought to market with their 

IES LM–80–2008 testing already 

complete. (CA IOUs, No. 19 at pp. 5–6) 

Two commenters requested further 

clarification of IES LM–80–2008. 

Regarding the temperature 

requirements, South Korea commented 

that international standards do not 

prescribe any specific temperatures at 

which to measure the lumen 

maintenance of the LED source. If DOE 

determines it is important to test the 

sources at 55 °C and 85 °C, DOE should 

seek scientific justification for these 

requirements. (South Korea, No. 17 at p. 

3) Samsung also requested that DOE 

specify the location on the LED source 

where temperature is measured. 

(Samsung, No. 14 at p. 1) 

DOE also received several comments 

indicating that DOE’s proposal for 

procurement of LED source lumen 

maintenance data could require 

disassembly of a lamp in some cases. 

GE, OSI, and NEMA commented that 

manufacturers would need to extract the 

LED source from the finished lamp 

product if IES LM–80–2008 data is 

unavailable. (GE, Public Meeting 

Transcript, No. 7 at p. 94, 95, 100; OSI, 

Public Meeting Transcript, No. 7 at pp. 

100–101; NEMA, No. 16 at p. 6) To 

avoid extracting the LED source, GE 

recommended that DOE consider 

multiple lifetime measurement 

approaches depending on the 

availability of IES LM–80–2008 data. 

(GE, Public Meeting Transcript, No. 7 at 

pp. 78–79) 

In the NOPR, DOE also proposed 

using the relevant guidelines from an 

ENERGY STAR specification document 

to measure the lumen maintenance for 

LED sources.37 77 FR at 21048 Cree 

commented that for lamps that use both 

white and red LED sources there is 

uncertainty as to whether the IES LM– 

80–2008 data from the individual 

sources can be added together to 

accurately represent their combined 

performance. Cree also noted ENERGY 

STAR is currently accepting this 

practice. (Cree, Public Meeting 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2

32032 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 106 / Tuesday, June 3, 2014 / Proposed Rules 

Transcript, No. 7 at p. 106) Both NEMA 

and Radcliffe Advisors stated that this is 

not an issue because DOE’s test 

procedure should not require testing of 

any individual component of an LED 

lamp. All testing procedures should 

measure performance of the complete 

lamp product. (NEMA, No. 16 at p. 4– 

5; Radcliffe Advisors, No. 13 at p. 1) 

DOE agrees there are drawbacks 

(including disassembly of the lamp to 

extract an LED source) to testing the 

LED source component as a proxy for 

estimating the lifetime of an LED lamp 

as outlined in IES LM–80–2008. 

Therefore, DOE has developed a new 

proposal that only requires testing of an 

LED lamp and is no longer using the test 

procedures in IES LM–80–2008 or IES 

TM–21–2011. The new test procedure 

for LED lamps indicates that after the 

test duration, lumen output must be 

measured as specified in IES LM–79– 

2008. The lifetime of the LED lamp can 

then be projected using an equation. 

The proposed method for lifetime 

testing is discussed in more detail in 

section III.D.3. 

d. Test Conditions 

In the NOPR, DOE proposed that the 

temperature of the surrounding air 

during testing be maintained between 

the case temperature and 5 °C below the 

case temperature as specified in section 

4.4.2 of IES LM–80–2008. DOE also 

proposed that airflow around the LED 

sources be as specified in section 4.4.3 

of IES LM–80–2008, which states that 

the airflow shall be maintained to 

minimize air drafts but allow some 

movement of the air to avoid thermal 

stratification. 77 FR at 21046 NEMA and 

Cree commented that the upcoming IES 

LM–80–2008 revisions will include 

recommendations on best practices for 

measuring and monitoring air flow 

through the test system. (NEMA, Public 

Meeting Transcript, No. 7 at p. 97; Cree, 

Public Meeting Transcript, No. 7 at p. 

97) However, NEMA indicated that 

current test methods have led industry 

to believe that the surrounding air 

temperature and airflow do not have 

noticeable impact on long-term LED 

lumen degradation. They suggested that 

current IES LM–79–2008 air movement 

requirements are more than adequate to 

ensure the accuracy of test data. (NEMA, 

No. 16 at p. 5) TUD disagreed with the 

specified test conditions, indicating that 

they cannot sufficiently simulate all real 

world conditions. (TUD, No. 15 at p. 1) 

As previously mentioned, for this 

SNOPR, DOE has developed a test 

procedure that only requires testing of 

an LED lamp. Therefore, DOE no longer 

references IES LM–80–2008, which 

applies to LED sources. The SNOPR has 

proposed less stringent ambient 

temperature and airflow conditions for 

periods when a lamp is operating but 

measurements are not being taken. 

These requirements are discussed in 

more detail in section III.D.3.b. 

e. LED Source Orientation 

In the NOPR, DOE proposed that the 

LED sources be operated in accordance 

with section 4.4.4 of IES LM–80–2008, 

which requires operating LED sources in 

the orientation specified by the source 

manufacturer. Id. DOE noted that it is 

not specifying the orientation for testing 

LED sources and invited interested 

parties to comment on whether the 

operating orientation of the LED sources 

during testing affects the lumen 

depreciation over time. Cree, Samsung, 

and NEMA commented that DOE should 

not require additional marking or testing 

based on orientation. (Cree, Public 

Meeting Transcript, No. 7 at p. 98; 

Samsung, No. 14 at p. 1; NEMA, No. 16 

at p. 6) NEMA stated that the orientation 

specified in IES LM–80–2008 is only 

provided to establish a common testing 

protocol, not because there is any 

evidence that orientation affects 

performance. In this SNOPR, DOE is not 

referencing the test procedures provided 

in IES LM–80–2008, which apply to 

LED sources. Instead, DOE is proposing 

a new test procedure for lifetime which 

measures the performance of LED 

lamps. Because DOE believes that 

orientation impacts the performance of 

LED lamps, DOE is proposing that 

lamps be tested in both the base-up and 

base-down positions. The orientation 

requirements for lifetime are discussed 

in section III.C.3.b. 

f. External Driver Requirements 

As specified in IES LM–80–2008, in 

the NOPR, DOE proposed using an 

external driver that is compliant with 

manufacturer’s guidance to drive the 

LED source. 77 FR at 21047 Both Cree 

and NEMA opposed using external 

drivers to test LED sources, while 

Samsung thought the use of an external 

driver was appropriate. (Cree, Public 

Meeting Transcript, No. 7 at p. 99; 

NEMA, No. 16 at p. 6; Samsung, No. 14 

at p. 1) NEMA indicated that the FTC 

label only regulates medium screw-base 

products (as defined in CFR 430.2). 

Therefore, if the lamp is to connect to 

the power supply via an ANSI base, 

there must be an integrated driver rather 

than an external driver. (NEMA, No. 16 

at p. 6) In this SNOPR, DOE is 

proposing a new test procedure that 

measures the performance of an LED 

lamp and is no longer utilizing the test 

procedures provided in IES LM–80– 

2008. The new proposal does not 

require the use of an external driver 

because an internal driver is included in 

an integrated LED lamp. The SNOPR 

proposal for determining the lifetime of 

LED lamps is detailed in section III.D.3. 

g. Lumen Maintenance Measuring 

Equipment 

IES LM–80–2008 specifies using a 

spectroradiometer to measure the lumen 

output of an LED source. In the NOPR, 

DOE proposed using a spherespectroradiometer, sphere-photometer, 

or a goniophotometer to measure the 

lumen output of the LED source. 77 FR 

at 21043 Cree agreed that all three 

instruments are appropriate to measure 

the lumen output of LED sources. Cree 

indicated that IES LM–80–2008 does not 

specify the use of a goniophotometer 

because this equipment cannot be used 

to measure many of the other 

photometric and electrical 

characteristics that the standard 

requires. (Cree, Public Meeting 

Transcript, No. 7 at p. 103) NEMA 

disagreed with DOE’s proposal and 

recommended that DOE not modify the 

IES LM–80–2008 procedures. (NEMA, 

Public Meeting Transcript, No. 7 at p. 

104; NEMA, No. 16 at p. 6) Samsung 

commented that requiring only a 

sphere-spectroradiometer would be 

suitable. (Samsung, No. 14 at p. 1) 

For this SNOPR, DOE is no longer 

proposing to use the test procedures 

provided in IES LM–80–2008. Because 

DOE proposes to measure the lifetime of 

LED lamps rather than LED sources, the 

SNOPR proposes the use of the lumen 

output measuring equipment described 

in IES LM–79–2008. As discussed in 

section III.C.3.b, DOE proposes that the 

instrumentation used for lumen output 

measurement of LED lamps be as 

described in sections 9.1 and 9.2 of IES 

LM–79–2008 and that goniometer 

systems not be used. 

h. LED Source Seasoning 

Regarding seasoning of the LED 

source for lifetime measurements, the 

Joint Comment argued that if DOE 

proposes a lifetime test method that 

involves projection of the LED source 

using the Arrhenius equation as the 

functional form of lumen degradation, 

the proposal should include seasoning. 

(Joint Comment, No. 18 at pp. 5–6) 

DOE’s proposal in the SNOPR 

(discussed in section III.D.3) involves 

measurements of the LED lamp, not the 

LED source. Therefore, DOE is not 

proposing a seasoning requirement for 

LED sources in the SNOPR. 

i. Maximum Lifetime 

In the NOPR, DOE proposed 

projecting the lifetime as specified in 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2

Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 106 / Tuesday, June 3, 2014 / Proposed Rules 32033 

38The Philips L-Prize Winning LED Bulb is rated 

at 30,000 hours and has undergone over 7,000 hours 

of lumen maintenance testing. 

www.lightingprize.org/60watttest.stm. 

section 5.0 of IES TM–21–2011. DOE 

also proposed that if the projected rate 

lifetime is greater than 25,000 hours, the 

maximum lifetime is 25,000 hours. If 

the projected lifetime is less than 25,000 

hours, the lifetime is the projected 

value. 77 FR at 21048 

Litecontrol, Radcliffe Advisors, South 

Korea, Kritzer, an Anonymous 

commenter, the CA IOUs, NEMA, and 

Philips disagreed with the proposal to 

cap lifetime at 25,000 hours, stating that 

applying an arbitrary cap discourages 

manufacturer improvements to lifetime. 

(Litecontrol, No. 11 at p. 1; Radcliffe 

Advisors, No. 13 at p. 2; South Korea, 

No. 17 at p. 3; Kritzer, No. 8 at p. 1; 

Anonymous, No. 8 at p. 1; CA IOUs, No. 

19 at p. 4; NEMA, Public Meeting 

Transcript, No. 7 at p. 65, 72–74; 

NEMA, No. 16 at p. 5; Philips, Public 

Meeting Transcript, No. 7 at p. 111) 

NEMA commented that applying a cap 

of 25,000 hours is contrary to FTC 

instruction, contradicts the recent LPrize winning lamp’s lifetime rating,38

and limits payback analysis for rebate 

programs. (NEMA, No. 16 at p. 5) The 

Joint Comment indicated that the 

lifetime cap leaves little incentive for 

manufacturers to test for longer periods 

of time with larger samples to reduce 

measurement uncertainty. (Joint 

Comment, No. 18 at p. 5) Kritzer 

pointed out that LED lamps are rapidly 

improving in performance and limiting 

these products to a lifetime of 25,000 

hours would affect their ability to 

compete with fluorescent technologies, 

which advertise lifetimes as long as 

40,000 hours. (Kritzer, No. 8 at p. 1) 

Some interested parties suggested 

alternate proposals for limiting 

maximum lifetime claims. South Korea 

proposed that the lifetime cap be raised 

to 36,000 hours to be consistent with 

IES TM–21–2011, which specifies that if 

the LED sources are tested beyond 6,000 

hours they can report up to 36,000 

hours. (South Korea, No. 17 at p. 3) 

NIST commented that the lifetime cap 

should only be raised if manufacturers 

can provide statistics to prove their 

reported values. (NIST, Public Meeting 

Transcript, No. 7 at p. 78) Alternatively, 

NEMA suggested that methods for 

projecting lifetime beyond 25,000 hours 

could be drawn from the ENERGY 

STAR solid-state lighting (hereafter 

referred to as SSL) program and other 

products such as electronic fluorescent 

ballasts. (NEMA, No. 16 at p. 7) The 

ENERGY STAR test procedure for 

lifetime includes a projection method 

based on lumen maintenance testing of 

an integrated lamp and does not require 

testing of the embedded LED source. In 

addition, their projection method 

specifies that an LED lamp has the 

potential to be rated at a lifetime greater 

than 25,000 hours if additional testing 

beyond the minimum required 6,000 

hours of lumen maintenance testing is 

conducted (see supra note 28). The Joint 

Comment agreed with the need to limit 

unreasonable lifetime claims and asked 

DOE to work with industry to 

investigate a set of confidence criteria to 

define a lifetime metric. (Joint 

Comment, No. 18 at p. 5) The Joint 

Comment argued that the goal of the 

FTC Lighting Facts label should be to 

give customers the most accurate 

information possible regarding the 

quality and lifetime of this product, and 

that establishing proper test procedures 

will help ensure this happens. (Joint 

Comment, No. 18 at p. 5) 

After considering the comments about 

the NOPR lifetime cap proposal, DOE 

has removed the 25,000 hour lifetime 

cap and developed a proposal where the 

maximum lifetime of LED lamps 

depends on the test duration. To 

prevent unreasonable lifetime claims 

based on a limited amount of test data, 

DOE proposes that lifetime claims be 

limited to no more than four times the 

duration of the test period. This limit 

reflects ENERGY STAR’s requirements 

to support lifetime claims beyond 

25,000 hours, which require a test 

duration that is 25 percent of the 

maximum projection. For example, to 

report a projected L70 lifetime of 30,000 

hours, at least 7,500 hours of testing 

(and a lumen maintenance of at least 70 

percent at that time) would be required. 

Requiring four times the duration of the 

test period is more conservative than 

industry standard IES TM–21–2011 for 

LED sources, which limits the L70

projection to no more than 5.5 or 6 

times the testing time (depending on 

sample size). A more conservative 

approach is reasonable because this test 

procedure applies to integrated LED 

lamps rather than LED sources. DOE 

invites comment on the proposed 

requirement to limit lifetime claims to 

four times the duration of the test 

period. 

j. Market Introduction 

TUD commented that requiring a 

minimum test duration of 6,000 hours 

could delay the market introduction of 

LED lamp products. (TUD, No. 15 at p. 

1) In this SNOPR, DOE is proposing a 

new test method which does not require 

a minimum duration of testing. Rather, 

DOE allows the manufacturer to 

determine the test duration and then 

limits lifetime claims to four times the 

test duration. 

3. SNOPR Proposed Lifetime Method 

In this SNOPR, DOE proposes a new 

test procedure for lifetime that 

addresses many of the stakeholder 

concerns regarding the NOPR proposal 

for measuring the lifetime of LED lamps. 

This proposal is simple, straightforward, 

and allows significant flexibility if 

lifetimes of LED products change in the 

future. As stated in section III.D.1, DOE 

defines the lifetime of an LED lamp as 

the time at which a lamp reaches a 

lumen maintenance of 70 percent (i.e., 

70 percent of initial lumen output, or 

L70). In this SNOPR, DOE proposes to 

measure the lumen output of an LED 

lamp rather than the LED source 

contained in the lamp. Thus, the test 

procedure directly measures the 

performance of the actual product rather 

than an internal component. This 

considerably simplifies compliance 

testing and provides a consistent 

procedure to be used for all products. 

The methodology proposed in the 

SNOPR consists of four main steps: (1) 

measuring the initial lumen output; (2) 

operating the lamp for a period of time 

(test duration); (3) measuring the lumen 

output at the end of the test duration; 

and (4) projecting L70 using an equation 

adapted from the underlying 

exponential decay function in ENERGY 

STAR’s most recent specification for 

integrated LED lamps, Program 

Requirements for Lamps (Light Bulbs): 

Eligibility Criteria—Version 1.0. (see 

supra note 10) The equation projects 

lifetime using the test duration and the 

lumen maintenance at the end of the 

test duration as inputs. The following 

sections discuss the methodology in 

greater detail. 

a. Initial Lumen Output 

Initial lumen output is the measured 

amount of light that a lamp provides at 

the beginning of its life, after it is 

initially energized and stabilized using 

the stabilization procedures in section 

III.C.4.b. An initial lumen output 

measurement is required to calculate 

lumen maintenance, which is an input 

for the lifetime projection. The test 

procedure for lumen output is described 

in section III.B. The methodology, test 

conditions, and setup requirements are 

unchanged when measuring initial 

lumen output for the lifetime test 

procedure. 

b. Test Duration 

The period of time starting 

immediately after the initial lumen 

output measurement and ending when 

the final lumen output measurement is 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2

32034 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 106 / Tuesday, June 3, 2014 / Proposed Rules 

39 ‘‘Approved Method Life Testing of Compact 

Fluorescent Lamps.’’ Approved by IES on December 

13, 2010. 

40NEMA Comments on ENERGY STAR Program 

Requirements Product Specification for Lamps 

(Light Bulbs) Version 1.0, Draft 2http://

energystar.gov/products/specs/sites/products/files/

NEMA.pdf. 

recorded, is referred to as the ‘‘test 

duration’’ or time ‘‘t.’’ The test duration 

does not include any time when the 

lamp is not energized. If lamps are 

turned off (possibly for transport to 

another testing area or during a power 

outage), DOE proposes that the time 

spent in the off-state not be included in 

the test duration. DOE does not specify 

a minimum test duration or 

measurement interval, so manufacturers 

can customize the test duration based 

on the expected lifetime of the LED 

lamp. During this time, the LED lamps 

are turned on (energized) and operated 

for a period of time determined by the 

manufacturer. To reduce test burden, 

the operating conditions required 

during the test duration while 

measurements are not being taken are 

less stringent than those required when 

taking photometric measurements (e.g., 

ambient temperature). The following 

sections discuss the required operating 

conditions for lamp operation between 

lumen output measurements in more 

detail. 

Ambient Temperature and Air Flow 

DOE recognizes that while operating 

an LED lamp, lumen output can vary 

with changes in ambient temperature, 

air flow, vibration, and shock. For this 

reason, DOE proposes specific 

requirements for quantities such as 

ambient temperature and air flow for 

photometric measurements in section 

III.C.2. However, because lamps may 

need to be operated for an extended 

period of time for the purpose of 

lifetime testing, DOE proposes less 

stringent requirements when 

measurements are not being taken. DOE 

proposes that ambient temperature be 

maintained between 15 °C and 40 °C. 

DOE also proposes minimizing air 

movement surrounding the test racks, 

and that the LED lamps not be subject 

to excessive vibration or shock. These 

test conditions will enable reliable, 

repeatable, and consistent test results 

without significant test burden and are 

discussed in further detail below: 

To determine ambient temperature 

requirements, DOE reviewed industry 

standard IES LM–65–10 ‘‘Approved 

Method Life Testing of Compact 

Fluorescent Lamps.’’ 39 Section 4.3 of 

IES LM–65–10 requires that ambient 

temperature be controlled between 

15 °C and 40 °C. Although industry 

standard IES LM–65–10 is intended for 

compact fluorescent lamps, DOE 

proposes that this ambient temperature 

range is appropriate for the operation of 

LED lamps because NEMA commented 

that current test methods have led 

industry to believe that the surrounding 

air temperature and airflow does not 

have a noticeable impact on long-term 

LED lumen degradation. (NEMA, Public 

Meeting Transcript, No. 7 at pp. 2–3; 

NEMA, No. 16 at p. 2–3) DOE believes 

that an ambient temperature range 

between 15 °C and 40 °C encompasses 

the majority of possible room 

temperature conditions while limiting 

test burden. Therefore, in this SNOPR, 

DOE proposes that ambient temperature 

be controlled between 15 °C and 40 °C. 

DOE requests comments on this 

proposal. 

DOE proposes that LED lamp testing 

racks be open and designed with 

adequate lamp spacing and minimal 

structural components to maintain 

ambient temperature conditions. 

Furthermore, similar to the 

requirements in section 4.2 of IES LM– 

65–10, DOE proposes minimizing 

airflow surrounding the LED lamp 

testing racks and that the lamps not be 

subjected to excessive vibration or 

shock. DOE believes that these 

requirements would minimize the 

impact of airflow and the physical 

environment while minimizing test 

burden. DOE invites comments on the 

minimization of vibration, shock, and 

air movement, as well as the 

requirement for adequate lamp spacing 

during lamp operation in order to 

maintain ambient temperature 

conditions. 

Power Supply 

DOE proposes that section 3.1 of IES 

LM–79–2008 be incorporated by 

reference to specify requirements for 

both AC and DC power supplies. This 

section specifies that an AC power 

supply shall have a sinusoidal voltage 

waveshape at the input frequency 

required by the LED lamp such that the 

RMS summation of the harmonic 

components does not exceed three 

percent of the fundamental frequency 

while operating the LED lamp. Section 

3.2 of IES LM–79–2008 also requires 

that the voltage of an AC power supply 

(RMS voltage) or DC power supply 

(instantaneous voltage) applied to the 

LED lamp shall be within ±0.2 percent 

of the specified lamp input voltage. 

However, DOE determined that the IES 

LM–79–2008 voltage tolerances are too 

burdensome to maintain for the 

extended time period for which a lamp 

may need to be operated to determine 

lifetime. When not taking 

measurements, DOE proposes to adopt 

provisions similar to section 5.3 of IES 

LM–65–10 which requires that the input 

voltage be monitored and regulated to 

within ±2.0 percent of the rated RMS 

voltage. DOE believes that this 

requirement is achievable with minimal 

test burden and provides reasonable 

stringency in terms of power quality 

based on its similarity to voltage 

tolerance requirements for other lamp 

types. DOE invites comments on the 

proposal to adopt section 3.1 of IES LM– 

79–2008 requirements for both AC and 

DC power supplies. DOE also requests 

comment on the requirement that input 

voltage be monitored and regulated to 

within ±2.0 percent of the rated RMS 

voltage as specified in section 5.3 of IES 

LM–65–2010. 

Lamp Mounting and Orientation 

DOE proposes that the LED lamps be 

tested in the base-up and base-down 

orientations for lumen maintenance 

testing. Section III.C.3.b notes that LED 

lamp test data provided by ENERGY 

STAR, as well as PG&E, CLASP, and 

CLTC, has revealed that there was 

variation between the base-up, basedown and horizontal orientations (see 

supra note 20). Of the three orientations, 

analysis revealed that the base-up and 

base-down orientations represent the 

best (highest lumen output) and worst 

(lowest lumen output) case scenarios. 

Electrical Settings 

DOE proposes adopting the electrical 

settings in section 7.0 of IES LM–79– 

2008. Section III.C.3.d details the 

required electrical settings for input 

voltage and how to operate lamps with 

multiple modes of operation, such as 

variable CCT and dimmable lamps. 

Operating Cycle 

Lifetime test procedures for other 

lamp types sometimes require 

‘‘cycling,’’ which means turning the 

lamp on and off at specific intervals 

over the test period. However, industry 

has stated that unlike other lighting 

technologies, the lifetime of LED lamps 

is minimally affected by power 

cycling.40 Therefore, in this SNOPR, 

DOE proposes to operate the LED lamp 

continuously and requests feedback on 

the appropriateness of not requiring 

cycling in the test procedure for 

lifetime. 

c. Lumen Output at the End of the Test 

Duration 

Any lumen output measurement after 

the measurement of initial lumen 

output, including that at the end of the 

test duration, is measured under the 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2

Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 106 / Tuesday, June 3, 2014 / Proposed Rules 32035 

conditions and setup described in 

section III.B. DOE proposes stabilizing 

the LED lamp before measuring lumen 

output at the end of the test duration. 

Section III.C.4.b details the LED lamp 

stabilization procedure. 

d. Lumen Maintenance Calculation and 

Lifetime Projection 

As discussed in section III.D.1, DOE 

proposes to define LED lamp lifetime as 

the time required to reach a lumen 

maintenance of 70 percent (L70). Lumen 

maintenance is the measure of lumen 

output after an elapsed operating time, 

expressed as a percentage of the initial 

lumen output (the definition of initial 

lumen output is provided in section 

III.D.3.a). DOE proposes that the lumen 

maintenance at the end of the test 

duration equal the lumen output at the 

end of the test duration (see section 

III.D.3.c) divided by the initial lumen 

output. 

DOE developed an equation to project 

the time at which an LED lamp reaches 

L70 based on the underlying exponential 

decay function used in the ENERGY 

STAR Program Requirements for Lamps 

(Light Bulbs): Eligibility Criteria— 

Version 1.0 (see supra note 10). 

ENERGY STAR utilizes an exponential 

decay function to calculate maximum 

L70 life claims between 15,000 and 

50,000 hours at increments of 5,000 

hours. The ENERGY STAR procedure 

requires a 6,000 hour test duration and 

provides lumen maintenance thresholds 

for each incremental L70 lifetime claim. 

Unlike ENERGY STAR, DOE does not 

have minimum lifetime requirements 

for LED lamps. Therefore, to enable 

reporting of lifetimes less than 15,000 

hours and greater than 50,000 hours, 

DOE has reorganized the underlying 

ENERGY STAR equation to calculate L70

given the initial lumen output ‘‘x0’’, the 

test duration ‘‘t’’, and the final lumen 

output at the end of the test duration 

‘‘xt’’ as inputs. DOE’s equation is 

detailed below. 

L70 = Time to Reach 70% Lumen 

Maintenance 

t = Test Duration 

x0 = Initial Lumen Output 

xt = Final Lumen Output at time ‘‘t’’ 

DOE requests comment on the 

proposed equation for projecting the L70

lifetime of LED lamps. 

DOE proposes that lifetime claims be 

limited to no more than four times the 

test duration ‘‘t.’’ For example, if an LED 

lamp is tested for 6,000 hours and has 

a lumen maintenance value of 93.1 

percent at that time, the L70 projection 

equation indicates that the L70 lifetime 

is about 30,000 hours. However, the 

maximum that could be reported based 

on the DOE proposal is only 24,000 

hours (four times the testing time of 

6,000 hours). For lumen maintenance 

values less than 70 percent, including 

lamp failures that result in complete 

loss of light output, the SNOPR 

proposes that lifetime must not be 

projected; instead, the lumen 

maintenance is equal to the previously 

recorded lumen output measurement at 

the test duration where the lumen 

maintenance is greater than or equal to 

70 percent. DOE also recognizes that it 

is possible that the calculated lumen 

maintenance at time ‘‘t’’ could be greater 

than or equal to 100 percent. When this 

occurs, DOE proposes that lifetime 

claims be determined by the maximum 

projection limit. Due to the similarity of 

the DOE and ENERGY STAR lifetime 

test procedures, manufacturers may 

choose to utilize lumen maintenance 

measurements collected for the 

ENERGY STAR specification. However, 

measurements must adhere to DOE’s 

electrical setting requirements proposed 

in section III.C.3.d and manufacturers 

must include all LED lamps within the 

10 lamp sample in the reported results 

including lamp failures. DOE requests 

comments on its proposal to limit the 

maximum lifetime to four times the test 

duration with no minimum test 

duration. 

Finally, DOE also notes that a 

manufacturer can report the test 

duration as measured without applying 

the projection equation. This approach 

applies to two scenarios. In the first 

scenario, a manufacturer can test the 

lamp until it reaches 70 percent lumen 

maintenance and use that test duration 

as the lifetime of the lamp. This is 

equivalent to using the projection 

equation, because the output of the 

projection equation would be the same 

as the test duration when lumen 

maintenance of 70 percent is reached. In 

the second scenario, a manufacturer can 

use the test duration associated with a 

lumen maintenance greater than 70 

percent. This scenario is equivalent to a 

manufacturer using the projection 

equation, but electing to report a more 

conservative value for business reasons. 

Reporting of conservative values is 

permitted and is also discussed in 

section III.F.3. 

E. Proposed Approach for Standby 

Mode Power 

EPCA section 325(gg)(2)(A) in part 

directs DOE to establish test procedures 

to include standby mode, ‘‘taking into 

consideration the most current versions 

of Standards 62301 and 62087 of the 

International Electrotechnical 

Commission . . .’’ (42 U.S.C. 

6295(gg)(2)(A)) IEC Standard 62087 

applies only to audio, video, and related 

equipment, but not to lighting 

equipment. Thus, IEC Standard 62087 

does not apply to this rulemaking, so 

DOE developed this SNOPR consistent 

with procedures outlined in IEC 

Standard 62301, which applies 

generally to household electrical 

appliances. However, to (1) develop a 

test method that would be familiar to 

LED lamp manufacturers and (2) 

maintain consistent requirements to the 

active mode test procedure, DOE 

referenced language and methodologies 

presented in IES LM–79–2008 for test 

conditions and test setup requirements. 

A standby mode power measurement 

is an input power measurement made 

while the LED lamp is connected to the 

main power source, but not generating 

light (active mode). All test condition 

and test setup requirements used for 

active mode measurements (e.g., input 

power) (see sections III.C.2 and III.C.3) 

also apply to standby mode power 

measurements. Once the test conditions 

and setup have been implemented, the 

LED lamp should be seasoned and 

stabilized in accordance with the 

requirements in sections III.C.4.a and 

III.C.4.b of this SNOPR. After the lamp 

has stabilized, the technician should 

send a signal to the LED lamp 

instructing it to enter standby mode 

(which is defined as providing zero light 

output). Standby power is then 

measured in accordance with section 5 

of IEC 62301. 

F. Basic Model, Sampling Plan, and 

Reported Value 

1. Basic Model 

In this SNOPR, DOE proposes 

amendments to the term ‘‘basic model’’ 

to include LED lamps. ‘‘Basic model’’ is 

currently defined (with some 

exceptions) to mean all units of a given 

type of covered product (or class 

thereof) manufactured by one 

manufacturer, having the same primary 

energy source, and which have 

essentially identical electrical, physical, 

and functional (or hydraulic) 

characteristics that affect energy 

consumption, energy efficiency, water 

consumption, or water efficiency; and 

with respect to general service 

fluorescent lamps, general service 

incandescent lamps, and reflector 

lamps: Lamps that have essentially 

identical light output and electrical 

characteristics—including lumens per 


mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2EP03JN14.011</GPH>
32036 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 106 / Tuesday, June 3, 2014 / Proposed Rules 

watt (lm/W) and color rendering index 

(CRI). 10 CFR 430.2 

DOE proposes to add a specification 

for LED lamps in the definition of basic 

model in order to provide further 

guidance on the electrical, physical, and 

functional characteristics that constitute 

a basic model. Specifically, DOE 

proposes that a basic model for an 

integrated LED lamp should represent 

lamps that have essentially identical 

light output and electrical 

characteristics including lumens per 

watt, CRI, CCT, and lifetime. Because 

these are the general characteristics by 

which manufacturers identify their 

lamps in catalogs and marketing 

material, DOE believes these parameters 

should be used to group lamps of the 

same type. 

DOE proposes to qualify the term 

‘‘basic model’’ in 10 CFR 430.2 for LED 

lamps as lamps that have essentially 

identical light output and electrical 

characteristics—including lumens per 

watt (lm/W), color rendering index 

(CRI), correlated color temperature 

(CCT), and lifetime. 

DOE requests comments on the 

revision to the definition of ‘‘basic 

model’’ to address LED lamps. 

2. Sampling Plan 

In the NOPR, DOE proposed a 

sampling plan for LED lamps to 

determine input power, lumen output, 

and CCT, and a separate sampling plan 

for LED sources to determine lifetime. 

DOE proposed testing a minimum of 21 

LED lamps to determine the input 

power, lumen output, and CCT. DOE 

proposed that manufacturers select a 

minimum of three lamps per month for 

seven months of production out of a 12 

month period. If lamp production 

occurs in fewer than seven months of 

the year, three or more lamps must be 

selected for each month that production 

occurs, distributed as evenly as possible 

to meet the minimum 21 unit 

requirement. The seven months need 

not be consecutive and could be a 

combination of seven months out of the 

12 months. Sample sizes greater than 21 

must be multiples of three so that an 

equal number of lamps were tested in 

each orientation (based on the lamp 

orientation requirements in the NOPR). 

77 FR at 21049 (April 9, 2012) 

To determine the lifetime of LED 

lamps, DOE proposed in the NOPR that 

the sample size for testing LED sources 

be as specified in section 4.2 of IES TM– 

21–2011. The IES TM–21–2011 industry 

standard requires a minimum of ten 

units to be tested, but recommends a 

sample set of 20 units for projecting the 

lifetime of the LED sources. The method 

of projection specified in IES TM–21– 

2011 cannot be used for less than ten 

units. 77 FR at 21049 

Regarding the sampling plan proposal 

for lumen output, CCT, and wattage 

testing, NEMA and P.R. China 

commented that the sampling plan 

should be based on the ENERGY STAR 

specification for integral LED lamps, 

which requires a sample size of 10: five 

base-up and five base-down. (NEMA, 

Public Meeting Transcript, No. 7 at p. 

49; NEMA, No. 16 at p. 8; P.R. China, 

No. 12 at pp. 4–5) In addition, ENERGY 

STAR has no requirements for how 

lamps are selected for testing. NEMA 

opposed gathering product samples over 

the course of a year because the 

associated time to gather and test 

samples is much greater than a year. 

(NEMA, No. 16 at p. 8) NEMA 

recommended that DOE not copy the 

sampling requirements from other 

lighting technology rules. (NEMA, No. 

16 at p. 9) In addition, NEMA, Cree, 

OSI, and South Korea commented that 

solid-state lighting is still an emerging 

technology and requiring large test 

samples and long testing time will 

significantly delay market introduction. 

(NEMA, Public Meeting Transcript, No. 

7 at p. 51; Cree, Public Meeting 

Transcript, No. 7 at p. 52; OSI, Public 

Meeting Transcript, No. 7 at p. 53; 

South Korea, No. 17 at pp. 2–3) Philips 

added that LED lamp designs are 

evolving rapidly and often product 

models are produced for less than a year 

before they are replaced by more 

efficient designs. (Philips, Public 

Meeting Transcript, No. 7 at p. 53) 

Lutron and Cree also commented that it 

is very important that the LED lamp test 

procedure comply with FTC labeling 

requirements, which allow for 

provisional labeling prior to completing 

all testing. (Lutron, Public Meeting 

Transcript, No. 7 at pp. 51–52; Cree, 

Public Meeting Transcript, No. 7 at p. 

52) Alternatively, GE suggested that 

DOE could retain the 21 lamp sample 

size, remove the requirement to collect 

products for testing over the course of 

a year, and only test product samples 

from initial production. (GE, Public 

Meeting Transcript, No. 7 at pp. 52–53) 

Radcliffe Advisors commented that a 21 

lamp sample size is small and does not 

have a rational basis. They 

recommended that DOE give 

consideration to the relationship 

between accuracy and the choice of 

sample size. (Radcliffe Advisors, No. 13 

at p. 1) 

In reference to the sampling plan for 

determining the lifetime of LED lamps, 

NEMA agreed with DOE’s summary of 

IES TM–21–2011 stating that it 

recommends a minimum of 20 LED 

sources be used during IES LM–80–2008 

testing to allow for lifetime projections 

of up to 36,000 hours. IES TM–21–2011 

allows fewer LED sources to be used, 

but reduces the maximum projection 

value to 25,000 hours. (NEMA, Public 

Meeting Transcript, No. 7 at pp. 113– 

114) An Anonymous commenter 

suggested allowing manufacturers to 

exclude from the overall average one 

unit that fails during lifetime testing. 

(Anonymous, No. 8 at p. 1) 

In this SNOPR, DOE proposes a new 

test procedure for lifetime that measures 

the performance of an LED lamp and not 

its subcomponents (i.e., the LED 

source). Therefore, DOE determined it 

did not need different sampling 

requirements for lifetime relative to the 

non-lifetime metrics. These sampling 

requirements proposed in the SNOPR 

for all metrics are described below. 

In order to address concerns regarding 

the sample size requirements in the 

NOPR proposal, DOE collected 

photometric test data from two sources, 

the first data set was provided by 

ENERGY STAR, and the second from a 

collaborative effort between PG&E, 

CLASP, and CLTC (see supra note 20). 

These test data, combined, represent 10 

samples of 47 different LED lamp 

products each. Statistical analysis of the 

LED lamp test data indicates that a 

minimum sample size of 10 lamps is 

appropriate to estimate the average 

input power, initial lumen output, 

efficacy, CCT, and CRI given the 

variation present in the data set. 

Standby mode power is assumed to vary 

to the same degree as input power 

(active mode). In addition, 37 LED 

lamps from the data set were tested for 

lumen output after 3,000 hours of 

operation. DOE used this data to help 

determine the sample size required for 

estimating the lifetime of the LED lamp. 

Analysis of the test data revealed that a 

minimum sample size of 10 should also 

be sufficient to estimate lumen output 

for the LED lamp after an elapsed 

operating time. In addition, requiring a 

minimum sample size of 10 LED lamps 

aligns with ENERGY STAR’s sampling 

procedure. Therefore, the SNOPR 

proposes testing a minimum of 10 LED 

lamps to determine the input power, 

lumen output, efficacy, CCT, CRI, 

lifetime, and standby mode power. DOE 

also proposes that all LED lamps within 

the sample, including those that fail 

prematurely, be included in the 

reported results for input power, lumen 

output, efficacy, CCT, CRI, lifetime, and 

standby mode power. DOE’s view is that 

LED lamp failure should not be exempt 

from reporting, because this would 

potentially mislead consumers, 

particularly with respect to lamp 

lifetime. Furthermore, DOE proposes 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2

Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 106 / Tuesday, June 3, 2014 / Proposed Rules 32037 

41Based on the collected LED lamp test data, 

provided by ENERGY STAR as well as PG&E, 

CLASP, and CLTC, DOE expects that the variability 

for measured lumen output is within a margin of 

3 percent. Thus, DOE proposes to divide the LCL 

value by 0.97 to adjust for this expected variation. 

For example, if the mean lumen output of 10 LED 

lamp units is 100 lumens with a standard deviation 

of three, the LCL value will be three percent lower 

than the mean, and dividing by 0.97 would result 

in a value that is equal to the lumen output mean 

of 100 lumens. In this case, the LCL divided by 0.97 

is equal to the sample mean, and 100 lumens would 

be reported. If the variation within a sample set 

exceeds DOE’s expectation, the sample set would 

have a smaller LCL, such that a value less than 100 

lumens would be reported. 

42Based on the collected LED lamp test data, 

provided by ENERGY STAR as well as PG&E, 

CLASP, and CLTC, DOE expects that variability for 

CRI is within a margin of 1 percent and for efficacy 

is within a margin of 2 percent. Thus, DOE 

proposes to divide the LCL value for CRI by 0.99 

and the LCL value for efficacy by 0.98 to adjust for 

this expected variation. 

43Based on the collected LED lamp test data, 

provided by ENERGY STAR as well as PG&E, 

CLASP, and CLTC, DOE expects that the variability 

for measured input power is within a margin of 1 

percent. Thus, DOE proposes to divide the UCL 

value by 1.01 to adjust for this expected variation. 

44 If the number 3,563 is rounded to three 

significant digits it becomes 3,560—with the 3, 5, 

and 6 being the significant digits. 

that no selection process be required for 

the LED lamp test procedure. Lamps for 

testing can be selected at any time from 

production units. DOE invites interested 

parties to comment on the 

appropriateness of adopting a minimum 

sample size of 10 LED lamps for input 

power, lumen output, efficacy, CCT, 

CRI, lifetime, and standby mode power. 

3. Reported Value 

As in the NOPR (77 FR at 21049), 

DOE proposes that the CCT of the units 

be averaged and that average be rounded 

as specified in section III.G. The average 

CCT is calculated using the following 

equation: 

and, x ̄ is the sample mean; n is the 

number of units; and xi is the ith unit. 

The LED lamp test data provided by 

ENERGY STAR as well as PG&E, 

CLASP, and CLTC (see supra note 20) 

indicates variability within a sample for 

measured lumen output, both at the 

initial lumen output reading and after 

an elapsed operating time. Therefore, 

DOE proposes that the reported value of 

lumen output as well as the reported 

value of lifetime be equal to the lower 

of the average lumen output of the 

sample set and the lower 99 percent 

confidence limit (LCL) of the sample 

mean divided by 0.97.41 Additionally, 

the LED lamp test data indicates that 

variability in the CRI and efficacy 

should be expected within a sample. 

Therefore, DOE proposes that the 

reported value of CRI be equal to the 

lower of the average CRI of the sample 

set and the lower 99 percent confidence 

limit of the sample mean divided by 

0.99, and that the reported value of 

efficacy be equal to the lower of the 

average efficacy of the sample set and 

the lower 99 percent confidence limit of 

the sample mean divided by 0.98.42

DOE proposes the following equation to 

calculate LCL for lumen output, 

lifetime, CRI, and efficacy: 

where, x ̄ is the sample mean; s is the 

sample standard deviation; n is the 

number of samples; and t0.99 is the t 

statistic for a 99 percent one-tailed 

confidence interval with n ¥ 1 degrees 

of freedom. 

Similarly, the LED lamp test data 

provided by ENERGY STAR as well as 

PG&E, CLASP, and CLTC (see supra 

note 20) indicates variability within a 

sample for measured input power. 

Therefore, DOE proposes that the 

reported value of input power and 

standby mode power be equal to the 

greater of the average lumen output of 

the sample set and the upper 99 percent 

confidence limit (UCL) of the sample 

mean divided by 1.01.43 DOE proposes 

the following equation to calculate UCL: 

where, x ̄ is the sample mean; s is the 

sample standard deviation; n is the 

number of samples; and t0.99 is the t 

statistic for a 99 percent one-tailed 

confidence interval with n ¥ 1 degrees 

of freedom. 

The proposed reported value 

requirements for lumen output, input 

power, CRI, lamp efficacy, lifetime, and 

standby mode power represent the 

‘‘best’’ value that manufacturers may 

report. For lumen output, CRI, lamp 

efficacy, and lifetime, the reported value 

may be rounded to a lower value. For 

input power and standby mode power, 

the reported value may be rounded to 

higher values. CCT must be reported as 

calculated, as the concept of a 

conservative value does not apply to 

these metrics. If conservative rounding 

is used, manufacturers must report the 

conservatively rounded value to DOE so 

that values reported to DOE match those 

used in all representations. 

DOE invites interested parties to 

comment on the proposed reported 

value requirements. 

G. Rounding Requirements 

In the SNOPR, DOE proposes 

rounding requirements for determining 

lumen output, input power, efficacy, 

CCT, CRI, estimated annual energy cost, 

lifetime, and standby mode power. Each 

of these is discussed in the following 

sections. 

1. Lumen Output 

In the NOPR, DOE proposed that the 

lumen output of all units be averaged 

and the value be rounded to the nearest 

tens digit. 77 FR at 21044 NEMA, OSI, 

and Cooper Lighting indicated that tight 

tolerances on rounding requirements are 

undesirable. (NEMA, No. 16 at p. 4; OSI, 

Public Meeting Transcript, No. 7 at pp. 

55–56; Cooper, Public Meeting 

Transcript, No. 7 at p. 56) NEMA 

commented that this will only set up 

unrealistic expectations of accuracy and 

repeatability. (NEMA, No. 16 at p. 4) In 

their written comment, NEMA 

suggested that for lumen output DOE 

round values of 0–499 to the nearest five 

lumens, 500–999 to the nearest ten 

lumens, and 1000–9999 lumens to three 

significant digits. If the lumen output is 

greater than or equal to 10,000, NEMA 

recommended that DOE round to two 

significant digits. (NEMA, No. 16 at p. 

4) ASAP offered another solution, 

suggesting that DOE determine 

appropriate rounding requirements 

based on the resolution of the test 

measurement. (ASAP, Public Meeting 

Transcript, No. 7 at p. 56) 

DOE agrees that rounding 

requirements should reflect realistic 

expectations of accuracy and 

repeatability. Based on a review of 

commercially available LED lamp 

products as well as testing equipment 

measurement capabilities, DOE 

determined that three significant figures 

is an achievable level of accuracy for 

LED lamps. Therefore, for this SNOPR, 

DOE proposes rounding of three 

significant figures 44 so that lumen 

outputs of all sizes are provided a 

similar level of specificity. 

2. Input Power 

In the NOPR, DOE proposed that the 

input power of all test units be averaged 

and the average value be rounded to the 

nearest tenths digit. 77 FR at 21044 

NEMA agreed that this is acceptable. 

(NEMA, No. 16 at p. 4) In the SNOPR, 

DOE maintains its proposal for the 

rounding requirements for input power. 


mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2EP03JN14.012</GPH> EP03JN14.013</GPH> EP03JN14.014</GPH>
32038 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 106 / Tuesday, June 3, 2014 / Proposed Rules 

45Navigant Consulting, Inc., ‘‘2010 U.S. Lighting 

Market Characterization’’ Prepared for the DOE 

Solid-State Lighting Program, January, 2012. http:// 

apps1.eere.energy.gov/buildings/publications/pdfs/

ssl/2010-lmc-final-jan-2012.pdf. 

3. Lamp Efficacy 

In the SNOPR, DOE proposes that the 

efficacy of LED lamps be rounded to the 

nearest tenth as this is consistent with 

rounding for other lighting technologies 

and is achievable with today’s 

equipment. 

4. Correlated Color Temperature 

In the NOPR, DOE proposed that the 

CCT of all units be averaged and the 

value be rounded to the tens digit. 77 FR 

at 21044 However, NEMA argued that 

most consumers can only distinguish 

lamp color temperature variations on 

the order of 100 K. Therefore, NEMA 

suggested that any CCT rating be 

rounded to the nearest hundreds digit. 

They stated that DOE’s proposal of 

rounding CCT values to the nearest tens 

digit would cause undue consumer 

confusion when comparing products. 

(NEMA, No. 16 at p. 4) 

In rulemakings for other lamp types, 

DOE established CCT rounding 

requirements to the nearest tens place 

based on the precision of the test 

procedure. In a rulemaking for general 

service fluorescent lamps, DOE 

consulted with NIST and concluded 

that, because all laboratories are able to 

measure CCT to three significant figures 

(a typical value is four digits), DOE 

should require manufacturers to round 

CCT to the nearest ten kelvin. 74 FR 

31829, 31835 (July 6, 2009). In this 

SNOPR, DOE continues this 

requirement and proposes rounding to 

the nearest tens digit for measurements 

of individual lamp units. 

However, DOE also recognizes 

NEMA’s comment that consumers may 

not be able to distinguish changes in 

CCT as small as 10 K. By using CCT 

values rounded to the nearest 10 K, 

consumers could be confused, since 

products with different CCT values may 

not have a perceptible difference in 

appearance. DOE does not have data or 

market studies quantifying the smallest 

difference in CCT that can be perceived 

by consumers, but welcomes comment 

on this topic. DOE has observed that the 

vast majority of CCT values provided in 

LED product literature are rounded to 

the nearest hundreds place. DOE 

proposes to round the reported value 

(i.e., certified or rated value) of the 

entire sample (all lamp units 

collectively) to the nearest hundreds 

place to avoid consumer confusion 

around any representations of CCT. DOE 

seeks comment on this proposal. 

5. Color Rendering Index 

In the SNOPR, DOE proposes that the 

CRI of LED lamps be rounded to the 

nearest whole number as this is 

consistent with rounding for other 

lighting technologies. 

6. Annual Energy Cost 

Consistent with FTC’s final rule that 

established the Lighting Facts label (75 

FR 41702 (July 19, 2010)), in the NOPR 

DOE proposed calculating the estimated 

annual energy cost for LED lamps, 

expressed in dollars per year, as the 

product of the average input power, in 

kilowatts, the electricity cost rate of 11 

cents per kilowatt-hour, and the 

estimated average annual use at three 

hours per day, which is 1,095 hours per 

year. 77 FR at 21044 DOE proposed that 

the estimated annual energy cost be 

rounded to the nearest cent because the 

cost of electricity is specified to the 

nearest cent. 

Although NEMA pointed out that the 

usage patterns and associated hours 

used in the NOPR do not agree with 

DOE’s 2010 U.S. Lighting Market 

Characterization,45 NEMA agreed with 

DOE’s proposed formula to calculate 

annual energy cost and the associated 

rounding to the nearest cent. (NEMA, 

No. 16 at p. 4) For consistency with 

FTC’s calculations for other lamp types, 

DOE proposes to maintain the rounding 

requirements for estimated annual 

energy cost. 

7. Lifetime 

In the SNOPR, DOE proposes that 

lifetime be rounded to the nearest whole 

hour. This is consistent with the unit of 

time used for lifetime metrics for other 

lamp technologies and is a level of 

accuracy a laboratory is capable of 

measuring with a standard time-keeping 

device. 

8. Life 

In the NOPR, DOE proposed that the 

life of LED lamps be calculated in terms 

of years based on three hours per day of 

operation. 77 FR at 21048 This is 

consistent with the FTC Lighting Facts 

label requirements for other lamp 

technologies. DOE also proposed that 

the resulting value be rounded to the 

nearest tenth of a year. Cooper Lighting 

recommended that DOE consider 

rounding to two significant digits rather 

than to tenths of a year to better capture 

the range in product lifetimes across the 

different lighting technologies. (Cooper, 

Public Meeting Transcript, No. 7 at p. 

109) NEMA stated that tight rounding 

tolerances only set up unrealistic 

expectations for the performance of LED 

lamps and indicated that rounding the 

lifetime to the nearest tenth of a year 

can be confusing to customers if they do 

not realize that the lifetime values are 

based on three hours of use per day. 

(NEMA, No. 16 at p. 4, 8) Furthermore, 

both NEMA and the CA IOUs argued 

that lifetime be reported in hours, 

because year-ratings are confusing to 

consumers, who might assume a 

calendar lifetime rather than a lifetime 

based on hourly use. (NEMA, No. 16 at 

p. 8; CA IOUs, No. 19 at p. 4) DOE 

proposes to retain the rounding 

requirements provided in the NOPR 

which states that the life of LED lamps 

be calculated in terms of years based on 

three hours per day of operation and 

that the resulting value be rounded to 

the nearest tenth of a year. As stated 

previously, this is consistent with the 

FTC Lighting Facts label requirements 

for other lamp technologies. FTC 

determines how the prescribed metrics 

appear on its Lighting Facts label, as 

well as the overall format of the label. 

Interested parties may contact FTC for 

concerns regarding the Lighting Facts 

label. 

9. Standby Mode Power 

In the SNOPR, DOE proposes 

rounding standby mode power to the 

nearest tenths place, consistent with its 

proposal for rounding input power for 

active mode in section III.G.2. 

H. Acceptable Methods for Initial 

Certification or Labeling 

Because testing for lifetime could 

require six months or more from start to 

finish, DOE anticipates the potential 

need for initial certification 

requirements (such as those currently 

provided in 10 CFR 429.12(e)(2)) or 

early or interim labeling requirements. 

Any initial certification requirements, if 

adopted, would be established by the 

ongoing general service lamp energy 

conservation standard rulemaking. See 

78 FR 73737 (Dec. 9, 2013) Early 

labeling requirements, if adopted, 

would be established by FTC. However, 

to support these potential needs, DOE 

considered acceptable methods for use 

with initial certification or labeling. 

Test methods with shorter overall 

start to finish time requirements are not 

available for measuring or projecting 

lifetime. Therefore, initial certification 

and labeling is best substantiated by 

comparisons to similarly designed 

lamps produced by the same 

manufacturer. A future rulemaking 

addressing standards for LED lamps 

could require manufacturers to provide 

a description of why the comparison to 

another lamp is valid, including a 

description of the expected impact of 

design differences on lifetime (if any). 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2

Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 106 / Tuesday, June 3, 2014 / Proposed Rules 32039 

DOE requests comment on the notion of 

early certification and labeling, and the 

acceptable methods for substantiating 

those claims. 

I. Laboratory Accreditation 

In the NOPR, DOE did not require 

testing LED lamps by an accredited 

laboratory. DOE received several 

comments during the May 2012 public 

meeting as well as written comment 

submissions inquiring whether DOE 

plans to require using accredited 

laboratory facilities. 

Cree commented that DOE should 

consider requiring certification of 

laboratories that are performing these 

tests as this is a requirement for the 

ENERGY STAR program. (Cree, Public 

Meeting Transcript, No. 7 at p. 57) OSI 

clarified that DOE should consider 

laboratory accreditation, and not a 

certification program. Accreditation is 

the process by which an authoritative 

third party gives formal recognition that 

a body or person is competent to carry 

out specific testing. Certification is a 

procedure by which a third party gives 

written assurance (certificate of 

conformity) that a product, process, or 

service conforms to specified 

requirements. (OSI, Public Meeting 

Transcript, No. 7 at pp. 60–61) NIST 

commented that laboratories are 

accredited for industry standards. If 

testing in accredited laboratories is 

required for the DOE’s LED test 

procedure, this could confuse clients 

expecting industry standards to be 

followed without modification. (NIST, 

Public Meeting Transcript, No. 7 at p. 

104) South Korea requested that in the 

final rule DOE detail its certification 

procedures, its requirements for testing 

laboratories, its designation process for 

testing laboratories, and future 

prospects concerning these matters. 

(South Korea, No. 17 at p. 4) Finally, 

Samsung suggested that DOE accept 

testing by existing laboratories that have 

received accreditation from the 

International Laboratory Accreditation 

Cooperation (ILAC). They argued that 

the ILAC promotes international 

acceptance of test results and inspection 

reports. (Samsung, No. 14 at p. 2) 

Regarding the National Voluntary 

Laboratory Accreditation Program 

(NVLAP) accreditation, DOE proposes 

in the SNOPR to require lumen output, 

input power, lamp efficacy, CCT, CRI, 

lifetime, and standby mode power (if 

applicable) testing be conducted by test 

laboratories accredited by NVLAP or an 

accrediting organization recognized by 

ILAC. NVLAP is a member of the ILAC 

organization, so test data collected by 

any laboratory accredited by an 

accrediting body recognized by ILAC 

would be acceptable. DOE requests 

comment on its proposal to require 

accreditation by NVLAP or an entity 

recognized by ILAC, and on the costs 

and benefits associated with such a 

requirement. 

The FTC has developed a Lighting 

Facts Label to help inform consumers 

about the efficiency and performance 

attributes of general service lamp 

products. The label became effective 

January 1, 2012, and requires that a 

lamp’s lumen output, energy cost, 

lifetime, CCT and wattage appear on the 

product packaging. Concerns regarding 

the FTC Lighting Facts Label 

requirements were raised at the May 

2012 NOPR public meeting and in 

several comment submissions. These 

comments pertained to the physical 

appearance and content displayed on 

the FTC Lighting Facts Label, the time 

it would take for FTC to certify LED 

lamp testing results, and whether using 

lumen maintenance as a proxy for 

lifetime could confuse or mislead 

consumers. The comments received are 

highlighted below: 

• OSI commented that FTC needs to 

take into account that product 

information on small packages is often 

printed too small, making the 

information illegible and/or difficult to 

identify. (OSI, Public Meeting 

Transcript, No. 7 at p. 81) 

• An Anonymous commenter asked 

for DOE to indicate how long it would 

take FTC to certify the results and grant 

permission to advertise the lifetime 

values required for the FTC Lighting 

Facts label. (Anonymous, No. 8 at p. 1) 

• NEMA, Radcliffe Advisors, OSI, 

Cooper Lighting, NEEA, the Joint 

Comment, and the CA IOUs commented 

that the proposed definition of lifetime 

would not be directly comparable to 

other general service lamp products, 

which could mislead or confuse 

consumers. (NEMA, Public Meeting 

Transcript, No. 7 at pp. 76–77; NEMA, 

No. 16 at p. 2; Radcliffe Advisors, No. 

13 at p. 1; OSI, Public Meeting 

Transcript, No. 7 at pp. 74–75; Cooper 

Lighting, Public Meeting Transcript, No. 

7 at p. 77; NEEA, No. 20 at p. 2; Joint 

Comment, No. 18 at pp. 1–2; CA IOUs, 

No. 19 at p. 4) Cree, Radcliffe Advisors, 

and the CA IOUs recommend that for 

LED lamps, FTC consider changing its 

label to ‘‘lumen maintenance’’ rather 

than ‘‘lifetime,’’ or not provide a 

lifetime value at all. (Cree, Public 

Meeting Transcript, No. 7 at p. 66, 67; 

Radcliffe Advisors, No. 13 at p. 1; CA 

IOUs, No. 19 at p. 4, 5) OSI pointed out 

that the FTC Lighting Facts label 

provides the opportunity to educate 

consumers on the meaning of lumen 

maintenance and how this differs from 

metrics used to define lifetime for other 

lighting products. (OSI, Public Meeting 

Transcript, No. 7 at pp. 74–75) 

DOE recognizes these concerns about 

the FTC Lighting Facts label. However, 

DOE does not have authority over how 

to display metrics on the FTC Lighting 

Facts label or the format of the label. 

Interested parties may contact FTC 

about these issues. 

J. State Preemption for Efficiency 

Metrics 

In the NOPR, DOE proposed test 

procedures for measuring lumen output 

and input power, and also specified 

testing dimmable lamps at full light 

output. 77 FR 21028 (April 9, 2012) 

Only those metrics required for the FTC 

Lighting Facts label were included in 

the NOPR test procedure. The FTC 

Lighting Facts label does not require 

reporting of metrics such as power 

factor, total harmonic distortion (THD), 

and dimming; therefore none were 

included in the NOPR test procedure for 

LED lamps. However, commenters 

noted that these metrics may appear in 

state mandates in the future, and 

therefore recommended they be 

included in DOE’s test procedure for 

LED lamps in order to avoid state 

preemption. 

The CA IOUs commented that DOE 

not preempt California from developing 

test procedures for other performance 

metrics such as efficacy, power factor, 

THD, and dimming. The CA IOUs 

commented that including in DOE’s 

proposal test methods for power factor, 

THD, and dimming would likely require 

significant additional time and industry 

coordination. They asked that DOE 

specifically identify these metrics and 

procedures as exempt from preemption. 

(CA IOUs, No. 19 at p. 2, 3) 

Representations about the energy 

consumption of an LED lamp must 

fairly disclose the results of testing in 

accordance with the DOE test 

procedure. See 42 U.S.C. 6293(c). The 

DOE test procedure for LED lamps will 

preempt any state regulation regarding 

the testing of the energy efficiency of 

LED lamps. See 42 U.S.C. 6297(a)(1). 

States that have regulations mandating 

efficiency standards for LED lamps must 

therefore use the DOE test procedure 

when providing for the disclosure of 

information with respect to any measure 

of LED lamp energy consumption. To 

support the general service lamp 

rulemaking, DOE proposes to define a 

calculation for the efficacy of an LED 

lamp as measured initial lamp lumen 

output in lumens divided by measured 

lamp input power in watts. See section 

III.C.4.d for details regarding the 

calculation for efficacy of an LED lamp. 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2

32040 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 106 / Tuesday, June 3, 2014 / Proposed Rules 

46 DOE LED Lighting Facts Partner List, http://

www.lightingfacts.com/Partners/Manufacturer. 

47ENERGY STAR Qualified Lamps Product List, 

http://downloads.energystar.gov/bi/qplist/Lamps_

Qualified_Product_List.xls?dee3-e997. 

48According to Hoovers.com, there are some 

small business LED lamp manufacturers with 

revenue as little as $120,000 per year. 

K. Effective and Compliance Date 

If adopted, the effective date for this 

test procedure would be 30 days after 

publication of the test procedure final 

rule in the Federal Register. Pursuant to 

EPCA, manufacturers of covered 

products must use the applicable test 

procedure as the basis for determining 

that their products comply with the 

applicable energy conservation 

standards adopted pursuant to EPCA 

and for making representations about 

the efficiency of those products. (42 

U.S.C. 6293(c); 42 U.S.C. 6295(s)) For 

those energy efficiency or consumption 

metrics covered by the DOE test 

procedures, manufacturers must make 

representations in accordance with the 

DOE test procedure methodology and 

sampling plan beginning 180 days after 

publication of the final rule in the 

Federal Register. 

IV. Procedural Issues and Regulatory 

Review 

A. Review Under Executive Order 12866 

The Office of Management and Budget 

(OMB) has determined that test 

procedure rulemakings do not constitute 

‘‘significant regulatory actions’’ under 

section 3(f) of Executive Order 12866, 

Regulatory Planning and Review, 58 FR 

51735 (Oct. 4, 1993). Accordingly, this 

action was not subject to review under 

the Executive Order by the Office of 

Information and Regulatory Affairs 

(OIRA) in the Office of Management and 

Budget. 

B. Review under the Regulatory 

Flexibility Act 

The Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 

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

of an initial regulatory flexibility 

analysis (IRFA) for any rule that by law 

must be proposed for public comment, 

unless the agency certifies that the rule, 

if promulgated, will not have a 

significant economic impact on a 

substantial number of small entities. As 

required by Executive Order 13272, 

‘‘Proper Consideration of Small Entities 

in Agency Rulemaking,’’ 67 FR 53461 

(August 16, 2002), DOE published 

procedures and policies on February 19, 

2003, to ensure that the potential 

impacts of its rules on small entities are 

properly considered during the DOE 

rulemaking process. 68 FR 7990. DOE 

has made its procedures and policies 

available on the Office of the General 

Counsel’s Web site: http://energy.gov/

gc/office-general-counsel. 

DOE reviewed the test procedures 

considered in this SNOPR under the 

provisions of the Regulatory Flexibility 

Act (RFA) and the policies and 

procedures published on February 19, 

2003. As discussed in more detail 

below, DOE found that because the 

proposed test procedures have not 

previously been required of 

manufacturers, all manufacturers, 

including small manufacturers, may 

potentially experience a financial 

burden associated with this new testing 

requirement. While examining this 

issue, DOE determined that it could not 

certify that the proposed rule, if 

promulgated, would not have a 

significant impact on a substantial 

number of small entities. Therefore, 

DOE has prepared an IRFA for this 

rulemaking. The IRFA describes the 

potential impacts on small businesses 

associated with LED lamp testing and 

labeling requirements. DOE has 

transmitted a copy of this IRFA to the 

Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the Small 

Business Administration (SBA) for 

review. 

1. Estimated Small Business Burden 

SBA has set a size threshold for 

electric lamp manufacturers to describe 

those entities that are classified as 

‘‘small businesses’’ for the purposes of 

the RFA. DOE used the SBA’s small 

business size standards to determine 

whether any small manufacturers of 

LED lamps would be subject to the 

requirements of the rule. 65 FR 30836, 

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

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

codified at 13 CFR part 121. The size 

standards are listed by North American 

Industry Classification System (NAICS) 

code and industry description and are 

available at www.sba.gov/sites/default/

files/Size_Standards_Table.pdf. LED 

lamp manufacturing is classified under 

NAICS 335110, ‘‘Electric Lamp Bulb 

and Part Manufacturing.’’ The SBA sets 

a threshold of 1,000 employees or less 

for an entity to be considered as a small 

business for this category. 

In the NOPR, DOE identified 17 

potential small businesses that 

manufacture LED lamps. In total, DOE 

estimated that the use of the NOPR test 

method for determining light output, 

input power, and CCT would result in 

testing-related labor costs of $57,000 for 

each of the identified small businesses. 

In addition, DOE estimated that the test 

method described in the NOPR for 

determining lifetime would result in 

related labor costs of $11,000 for each 

manufacturer. Finally, in the NOPR, 

DOE estimated initial setup costs of 

$12,000. DOE also indicated that the 

setup cost would be a one-time cost to 

manufacturers and that the labor costs 

to perform testing would be smaller 

than $68,000 after the first year of 

testing. 77 FR at 21050–1 (April 9, 2012) 

OSI indicated that they believe the 

number of impacted small businesses is 

greater than DOE’s estimate of 17 and 

speculated that the actual number could 

be between two and ten times greater. 

(OSI, Public Meeting Transcript, No. 7 

at pp. 117–118) NEMA suggested that 

DOE contact Jim Brodrick, Program 

Manager of the U.S. DOE SSL program, 

to help determine a better estimate for 

the total number of small businesses 

that will likely be affected by 

implementing this test procedure. 

(NEMA, Public Meeting Transcript, No. 

7 at p. 119) 

For this SNOPR, DOE reexamined the 

number of small businesses that will 

potentially be affected by the LED lamps 

test procedure. This reevaluation 

indicated that the test procedure 

requirements proposed in this SNOPR 

will apply to about 41 small business 

manufacturers of LED lamps. DOE 

compiled this revised list of 

manufacturers by reviewing the DOE 

LED Lighting Facts label list of partner 

manufacturers,46 the SBA database, 

ENERGY STAR’s list of qualified 

products,47 and performing a general 

search for LED manufacturers. DOE 

determined which companies 

manufacture LED lamps by reviewing 

company Web sites, the SBA Web site 

when applicable, calling companies 

directly, and/or reviewing the Hoovers 

Inc. company profile database. Through 

this revised process, DOE identified 41 

small businesses that manufacture LED 

lamps. DOE was also able to collect 

annual revenue estimates for several of 

the small business LED lamp 

manufacturers using the Hoovers.com 

company profile database. DOE 

determined that the median revenue of 

the identified small business 

manufacturers is $890,000.48 DOE 

requests comment on the estimated 

number of small businesses that would 

be impacted by the proposed 

rulemaking. 

DOE also received several comments 

about the estimate of testing burden. GE, 

Feit, and OSI expressed concern that 

DOE was underestimating the cost 

burden to small manufacturers because 

the costs associated with NOPR 

Approach 4 for lifetime testing would be 

significant if IES LM–80–2008 data were 

unavailable. (GE, Public Meeting 

Transcript, No. 7 at p. 117; Feit, Public 

Meeting Transcript, No. 7 at p. 120; OSI, 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2

Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 106 / Tuesday, June 3, 2014 / Proposed Rules 32041 

49Obtained from the Bureau of Labor Statistics 

(National Compensation Survey: Occupational 

Earnings in the United States 2008, U.S. 

Department of Labor (August 2009), Bulletin 2720, 

Table 3 (‘‘Full-time civilian workers,’’ mean and 

median hourly wages) http://bls.gov/ncs/ocs/sp/

nctb0717.pdf. 

50Additional benefits include; paid leave, 

supplemental pay, insurance, retirement and 

savings, Social Security, Medicare, unemployment 

insurance and workers compensation. 

51Obtained from the Bureau of Labor Statistics 

(News Release: Employer Cost For Employee 

Compensation—December 2012, U.S. Department of 

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

ecec.nr0.htm. 

Public Meeting Transcript, No. 7 at p. 

117) ICF International commented that 

DOE’s estimate for the cost of initial 

setup was low. ICF International 

estimated that if a manufacturer were to 

purchase all required testing equipment, 

train personnel to operate it, and then 

go through the accreditation process, it 

could cost more than $100,000. (ICF 

International, Public Meeting 

Transcript, No. 7 at p. 119, 120) Cree 

and Intertek also commented that 

instrumentation costs could be 

significant, pointing out that a Type C 

goniophotometer could cost as much as 

$200,000 and that a two meter 

integrating sphere with accessories 

could cost about $60,000. (Cree, Public 

Meeting Transcript, No. 7 at p. 120; 

Intertek, Public Meeting Transcript, No. 

7 at pp. 121–122) In addition to 

instrumentation costs, an anonymous 

commenter also indicated that the cost 

of storing inventory during lifetime 

testing would be significant and should 

be included in the cost burden estimate. 

(Anonymous, No. 8 at p. 1) When 

estimating the burden to small 

manufacturers, NEMA suggested that 

DOE also include FICA taxes, 

unemployment taxes, workman’s 

compensation, health care insurance, 

holiday and vacation time, and 

retirement benefits in addition to the 

office, laboratory, equipment, and other 

overhead costs for the engineers and 

their support staff. (NEMA, No. 16 at p. 

8) Finally, GE commented that it would 

be unlikely that small business 

manufacturers would want to set up an 

accredited laboratory for testing. They 

speculated that small manufacturers 

would likely send their LED lamps out 

for third party testing. (GE, Public 

Meeting Transcript, No. 7 at p. 115) 

In the NOPR, DOE determined that 

the labor rate to create the initial setup 

and conduct the testing for input power, 

lumen output, CCT, and lifetime of LED 

lamps would be $39.79 per hour.49 77 

FR at 21050 However, in its analysis for 

the SNOPR, DOE determined that an 

electrical engineer is likely over 

qualified, and would not be hired by 

manufacturers to conduct these required 

tasks. DOE’s view is that an electrical 

engineering technician is a better 

representation of the personnel likely to 

perform the initial setup and required 

tests for LED lamps. DOE estimated that 

the wages for an electrical engineering 

technician are $24.18 per hour.49 This 

cost is only representative of the hourly 

billing rate for an electrical engineering 

technician and does not include any 

other compensation costs. DOE 

estimated that providing additional 

benefits 50 would add 31 percent 51 to 

the overall cost to the manufacturer, 

increasing the cost of employing an 

electrical engineering technician to 

$31.68 per hour. For the SNOPR, DOE 

also applied this labor rate to 

measurement of standby mode power. 

DOE estimates that the labor costs 

associated with conducting the input 

power, lumen output, CCT, CRI, and 

standby mode power testing contribute 

to overall burden. However, DOE 

believes that calculating the efficacy of 

an LED lamp does not result in any 

incremental testing burden beyond the 

cost of carrying out lumen output and 

input power testing. DOE estimates that 

testing for input power, lumen output, 

CCT, CRI, and standby mode would 

require approximately four hours per 

lamp by an electrical engineering 

technician. DOE expects standby mode 

power testing to require a negligible 

incremental amount of time in addition 

to the time required for the other 

metrics. Therefore, DOE maintained its 

estimate of four hours per lamp used in 

the NOPR (77 FR at 21050) for testing 

for input power, lumen output, CCT, 

and CRI. DOE estimates about 41 small 

business manufacturers of LEDs would 

be impacted, each offering about 23 

different basic models. In total, using 

the DOE test method to determine light 

output, input power, CCT, CRI, and 

standby mode power would result in an 

estimated incremental labor burden of 

$29,140 for each manufacturer. DOE 

expects that the majority of 

manufacturers are already testing for 

lumen output, input power, CCT, and 

CRI as these metrics are well established 

and required within the industry 

standard IES LM–79–2008. However, 

DOE’s sample size, input power, and 

orientation settings may differ from 

those selected for a manufacturer’s 

existing data. Therefore, DOE included 

the cost of carrying out these tests in its 

assessment of testing burden. 

In addition, DOE estimates that 

lifetime testing would also contribute to 

overall cost burden. The initial setup 

would require a custom-built rack to 

mount up to 120 lamps for testing, 

which may require up to 120 hours of 

labor to build. The cost for an electrical 

engineering technician to build such a 

rack would be approximately $3,800. 

Similar to the NOPR analysis, DOE 

estimated that the material cost to build 

a custom-built rack holding 120 sockets 

would be $3,600, and the power supply 

and regulator costs would be $4,000 and 

$1,500 respectively. Therefore, the 

revised SNOPR estimate for the total 

cost to build one rack is approximately 

$12,900. DOE estimated that a total of 

two racks would be needed to hold 

about 23 different LED lamp models, 

each tested in sample sets of 10 lamps 

(a total of 230 LED lamps). Therefore, 

DOE estimates the total cost to build 

two test racks to be $25,800. However, 

DOE notes that LED lamp manufacturers 

may already have sufficient testing racks 

for their own internal uses and for FTC 

labeling requirement testing. DOE 

expects that manufacturers of LED 

lamps would already have other 

instrumentation necessary for testing 

because IES LM–79–2008 is the 

recommended standard for testing LED 

lamps for the FTC Lighting Facts label. 

The labor cost for lifetime testing also 

contributes to overall burden. DOE 

estimates that the combination of 

monitoring the lamps during the test 

duration, measuring lumen 

maintenance, and calculating lifetime at 

the end of the test duration would 

require approximately four hours per 

lamp by an electrical engineering 

technician. This estimate does not 

include the initial lumen output 

measurement required for the lifetime 

test procedure, because the testing 

burden for that measurement is already 

included in the estimate for input 

power, lumen output, CCT, and CRI 

testing. DOE estimates about 41 small 

business manufacturers of LEDs, each 

offering about 23 different basic models, 

would be affected. In total, DOE expects 

that using this test method to determine 

lifetime would result in testing-related 

labor costs of $29,140 for each 

manufacturer. 

As discussed in section III.I, DOE is 

also proposing to require test facilities 

conducting LED lamp light output, 

input power, CCT, CRI, lifetime, and 

standby mode power (if applicable) 

testing to be NVLAP-accredited or 

accredited by an organization 

recognized by NVLAP. However, 

NVLAP imposes a variety of fees during 

the accreditation process including 

fixed administrative fees, variable 

assessment fees, and proficiency testing 

fees. If a laboratory already has NVLAP 

accreditation for other industry 

standards, there would be no 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2

32042 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 106 / Tuesday, June 3, 2014 / Proposed Rules 

incremental administrative fees 

associated with the SNOPR proposal. 

However, if a laboratory does not 

already have NVLAP accreditation for 

other industry standards, there would 

be an administrative fee of $5,050 

assessed annually. NVLAP also collects 

an assessment fee corresponding to the 

amount of time the assessor requires to 

complete evaluation of the laboratory. A 

laboratory seeking to expand its scope of 

accreditation to include IES LM–79– 

2008 as well as DOE’s lifetime test 

procedure for LED lamps would most 

likely not experience an increase in 

cost. However, a laboratory with no 

existing NVLAP accreditations would 

likely require two full days of an 

assessor’s time at the cost of $7,470 per 

assessment. Assessments are required 

during the initial accreditation, on the 

first anniversary (year 1), and then every 

other year following the first 

anniversary (year 3, 5, 7, etc.). Finally, 

every laboratory seeking accreditation to 

IES LM–79–2008 is required to 

participate in SSL proficiency testing. A 

$2,800 fee is involved with this 

proficiency testing. 

For each manufacturer producing 23 

basic models, assuming testing 

instrumentation is already available, 

DOE’s estimate of the first year NVLAP 

accreditation cost would be $15,320, 

initial setup cost would be $25,800, and 

the labor costs to carry out testing 

would be approximately $58,280. 

Therefore, in the first year, for 

manufacturers without testing racks or 

NVLAP accreditation who choose to test 

in-house, DOE estimates a total cost 

burden of $99,400 or about $432 per 

LED lamp tested. DOE expects the setup 

cost to be a onetime cost to 

manufacturers. Further, DOE expects 

that the labor costs to perform testing 

would be smaller than $58,280 after the 

first year because only new products or 

redesigned products would need to be 

tested. Alternatively, if a manufacturer 

opts to send lamps to a third-party test 

facility, DOE estimates testing of lumen 

output, input power, CCT, CRI, lifetime, 

and standby mode power to cost $500 

per lamp. In total, the LED lamp test 

procedure would result in expected 

third party testing costs of $115,000 for 

each manufacturer of 23 basic models. 

DOE was able to collect annual 

revenue estimates for several of the 

small business LED lamp manufacturers 

using the Hoovers.com company profile 

database. DOE determined that the 

median revenue of the identified small 

business manufacturers is $890,000, 

therefore, initial testing costs would 

represent about 11.2 percent of revenue 

when completed in a manufacturer’s 

own laboratory, and 12.9 percent when 

completed through a third-party test 

facility. As mentioned earlier, the setup 

cost would be a one-time cost to 

manufacturers, and the labor costs to 

perform testing would be smaller after 

the first year of testing. Furthermore, 

when amortized over subsequent years, 

testing costs would be significantly less. 

DOE requests comments on its analysis 

of initial setup and labor costs as well 

as the average annual burden for 

conducting testing of LED lamps. 

2. Duplication, Overlap, and Conflict 

With Other Rules and Regulations 

DOE is not aware of any rules or 

regulations that duplicate, overlap, or 

conflict with the proposed rule being 

considered today. 

3. Significant Alternatives to the 

Proposed Rule 

DOE tentatively determined that there 

are no alternatives to the proposed test 

procedure, including test procedures 

that incorporate industry test standards 

other than the proposed standards. IES 

LM–79–2008, the test procedure 

referenced in this SNOPR, is the most 

commonly used industry standard that 

provides instructions for the electrical 

and photometric measurement of LED 

lamps. DOE also reviewed the efforts of 

other working groups, as suggested by 

interested parties, but was unable to 

find any U.S. or international standard 

that provides a test procedure for 

measuring and/or projecting LED lamp 

lifetime. The only publicly available 

approach for measuring LED lamp 

lifetime is the ENERGY STAR Program 

Requirements for Lamps (Light Bulbs): 

Eligibility Criteria—Version 1.0 (see 

supra note 10). 

C. Review Under the Paperwork 

Reduction Act of 1995 

DOE established regulations for the 

certification and recordkeeping 

requirements for certain covered 

consumer products and commercial 

equipment. 76 FR 12422 (March 7, 

2011). The collection-of-information 

requirement for the certification and 

recordkeeping was subject to review and 

approval by OMB under the Paperwork 

Reduction Act (PRA). This requirement 

was approved by OMB under OMB 

Control Number 1910–1400. Public 

reporting burden for the certification 

was estimated to average 20 hours per 

response, including the time for 

reviewing instructions, searching 

existing data sources, gathering and 

maintaining the data needed, and 

completing and reviewing the collection 

of information. 

There is currently no information 

collection requirement related to 

certifying compliance for LED lamps. 

Notwithstanding any other provision of 

the law, no person is required to 

respond to, nor must any person be 

subject to a penalty for failure to comply 

with, a collection of information subject 

to the requirements of the PRA, unless 

that collection of information displays a 

currently valid OMB Control Number. 

D. Review Under the National 

Environmental Policy Act of 1969 

In this proposed rule, DOE is 

proposing a test procedure for LED 

lamps that will be used to support the 

upcoming general service lamps energy 

conservation standard rulemaking as 

well as FTC’s Lighting Facts labeling 

program. DOE has determined that this 

rule falls into a class of actions that are 

categorically excluded from review 

under the National Environmental 

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

seq.) and DOE’s implementing 

regulations at 10 CFR part 1021. 

Specifically, this proposed rule would 

adopt existing industry test procedures 

for LED lamps, so it would not affect the 

amount, quality or distribution of 

energy usage, and, therefore, would not 

result in any environmental impacts. 

Thus, this rulemaking is covered by 

Categorical Exclusion A5 under 10 CFR 

part 1021, subpart D. Accordingly, 

neither an environmental assessment 

nor an environmental impact statement 

is required. 

E. Review Under Executive Order 13132 

Executive Order 13132, ‘‘Federalism,’’ 

64 FR 43255 (August 4, 1999) imposes 

certain requirements on agencies 

formulating and implementing policies 

or regulations that preempt State law or 

that have Federalism implications. The 

Executive Order requires agencies to 

examine the constitutional and statutory 

authority supporting any action that 

would limit the policymaking discretion 

of the States and to carefully assess the 

necessity for such actions. The 

Executive Order also requires agencies 

to have an accountable process to 

ensure meaningful and timely input by 

State and local officials in the 

development of regulatory policies that 

have Federalism implications. On 

March 14, 2000, DOE published a 

statement of policy describing the 

intergovernmental consultation process 

it will follow in the development of 

such regulations. 65 FR 13735. DOE has 

examined this proposed rule and has 

determined that it would not have a 

substantial direct effect on the States, on 

the relationship between the national 

government and the States, or on the 

distribution of power and 

responsibilities among the various 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2

Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 106 / Tuesday, June 3, 2014 / Proposed Rules 32043 

levels of government. EPCA governs and 

prescribes Federal preemption of State 

regulations as to energy conservation for 

the products that are the subject of this 

proposed rule. States can petition DOE 

for exemption from such preemption to 

the extent, and based on criteria, set 

forth in EPCA. (42 U.S.C. 6297(d)) No 

further action is required by Executive 

Order 13132. 

F. Review Under Executive Order 12988 

Regarding the review of existing 

regulations and the promulgation of 

new regulations, section 3(a) of 

Executive Order 12988, ‘‘Civil Justice 

Reform,’’ 61 FR 4729 (Feb. 7, 1996), 

imposes on Federal agencies the general 

duty to adhere to the following 

requirements: (1) eliminate drafting 

errors and ambiguity; (2) write 

regulations to minimize litigation; (3) 

provide a clear legal standard for 

affected conduct rather than a general 

standard; and (4) promote simplification 

and burden reduction. Section 3(b) of 

Executive Order 12988 specifically 

requires that Executive agencies make 

every reasonable effort to ensure that the 

regulation: (1) clearly specifies the 

preemptive effect, if any; (2) clearly 

specifies any effect on existing Federal 

law or regulation; (3) provides a clear 

legal standard for affected conduct 

while promoting simplification and 

burden reduction; (4) specifies the 

retroactive effect, if any; (5) adequately 

defines key terms; and (6) addresses 

other important issues affecting clarity 

and general draftsmanship under any 

guidelines issued by the Attorney 

General. Section 3(c) of Executive Order 

12988 requires Executive agencies to 

review regulations in light of applicable 

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

determine whether they are met or it is 

unreasonable to meet one or more of 

them. DOE has completed the required 

review and determined that, to the 

extent permitted by law, the proposed 

rule meets the relevant standards of 

Executive Order 12988. 

G. Review Under the Unfunded 

Mandates Reform Act of 1995 

Title II of the Unfunded Mandates 

Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA) requires 

each Federal agency to assess the effects 

of Federal regulatory actions on State, 

local, and Tribal governments and the 

private sector. Public Law 104–4, sec. 

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

proposed regulatory action likely to 

result in a rule that may cause the 

expenditure by State, local, and Tribal 

governments, in the aggregate, or by the 

private sector of $100 million or more 

in any one year (adjusted annually for 

inflation), section 202 of UMRA requires 

a Federal agency to publish a written 

statement that estimates the resulting 

costs, benefits, and other effects on the 

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

The UMRA also requires a Federal 

agency to develop an effective process 

to permit timely input by elected 

officers of State, local, and Tribal 

governments on a proposed ‘‘significant 

intergovernmental mandate,’’ and 

requires an agency plan for giving notice 

and opportunity for timely input to 

potentially affected small governments 

before establishing any requirements 

that might significantly or uniquely 

affect small governments. On March 18, 

1997, DOE published a statement of 

policy on its process for 

intergovernmental consultation under 

UMRA. 62 FR 12820; also available at 

http://energy.gov/gc/office-generalcounsel. DOE examined this proposed 

rule according to UMRA and its 

statement of policy and determined that 

the rule contains neither an 

intergovernmental mandate, nor a 

mandate that may result in the 

expenditure of $100 million or more in 

any year, so these requirements do not 

apply. 

H. Review Under the Treasury and 

General Government Appropriations 

Act, 1999 

Section 654 of the Treasury and 

General Government Appropriations 

Act, 1999 (Pub. L. 105–277) requires 

Federal agencies to issue a Family 

Policymaking Assessment for any rule 

that may affect family well-being. This 

rule would not have any impact on the 

autonomy or integrity of the family as 

an institution. Accordingly, DOE has 

concluded that it is not necessary to 

prepare a Family Policymaking 

Assessment. 

I. Review Under Executive Order 12630 

DOE has determined, under Executive 

Order 12630, ‘‘Governmental Actions 

and Interference with Constitutionally 

Protected Property Rights’’ 53 FR 8859 

(March 18, 1988), that this regulation 

would not result in any takings that 

might require compensation under the 

Fifth Amendment to the U.S. 

Constitution. 

J. Review Under Treasury and General 

Government Appropriations Act, 2001 

Section 515 of the Treasury and 

General Government Appropriations 

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

for agencies to review most 

disseminations of information to the 

public under guidelines established by 

each agency pursuant to general 

guidelines issued by OMB. OMB’s 

guidelines were published at 67 FR 

8452 (Feb. 22, 2002), and DOE’s 

guidelines were published at 67 FR 

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

this proposed rule under the OMB and 

DOE guidelines and has concluded that 

it is consistent with applicable policies 

in those guidelines. 

K. Review Under Executive Order 13211 

Executive Order 13211, ‘‘Actions 

Concerning Regulations That 

Significantly Affect Energy Supply, 

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

22, 2001), requires Federal agencies to 

prepare and submit to OMB, a 

Statement of Energy Effects for any 

proposed significant energy action. A 

‘‘significant energy action’’ is defined as 

any action by an agency that 

promulgated or is expected to lead to 

promulgation of a final rule, and that: 

(1) is a significant regulatory action 

under Executive Order 12866, or any 

successor order; and (2) is likely to have 

a significant adverse effect on the 

supply, distribution, or use of energy; or 

(3) is designated by the Administrator of 

OIRA as a significant energy action. For 

any proposed significant energy action, 

the agency must give a detailed 

statement of any adverse effects on 

energy supply, distribution, or use 

should the proposal be implemented, 

and of reasonable alternatives to the 

action and their expected benefits on 

energy supply, distribution, and use. 

This proposed regulatory action to 

establish a test procedure for measuring 

the lumen output, input power, efficacy, 

CCT, CRI, lifetime, and standby mode 

power of LED lamps is not a significant 

regulatory action under Executive Order 

12866. Moreover, it would not have a 

significant adverse effect on the supply, 

distribution, or use of energy, nor has it 

been designated as a significant energy 

action by the Administrator of OIRA. 

Therefore, it is not a significant energy 

action, and, accordingly, DOE has not 

prepared a Statement of Energy Effects. 

L. Review Under Section 32 of the 

Federal Energy Administration Act of 

1974 

Under section 301 of the Department 

of Energy Organization Act (Pub. L. 95– 

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

with section 32 of the Federal Energy 

Administration Act of 1974, as amended 

by the Federal Energy Administration 

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

788; FEAA) Section 32 essentially 

provides in relevant part that, where a 

proposed rule authorizes or requires use 

of commercial standards, the notice of 

proposed rulemaking must inform the 

public of the use and background of 

such standards. In addition, section 

32(c) requires DOE to consult with the 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2

32044 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 106 / Tuesday, June 3, 2014 / Proposed Rules 

Attorney General and the Chairman of 

the FTC concerning the impact of the 

commercial or industry standards on 

competition. 

The proposed rule incorporates test 

methods contained in the following 

commercial standards: ANSI/IESNA 

RP–16–2010 ‘‘Nomenclature and 

Definitions for Illuminating 

Engineering’’ and IES LM–79–2008 

‘‘Approved Method: Electrical and 

Photometric Measurements of SolidState Lighting Products.’’ The 

Department has evaluated these 

standards and is unable to conclude 

whether they fully comply with the 

requirements of section 32(b) of the 

FEAA, (i.e., that they were developed in 

a manner that fully provides for public 

participation, comment, and review). 

DOE will consult with the Attorney 

General and the Chairman of the FTC 

concerning the impact of these test 

procedures on competition prior to 

prescribing a final rule. 

V. Public Participation 

A. Submission of Comments 

DOE will accept comments, data, and 

information regarding this proposed 

rule no later than the date provided in 

the DATES section at the beginning of 

this proposed rule. Interested parties 

may submit comments using any of the 

methods described in the ADDRESSES

section at the beginning of this notice. 

Submitting comments via 

regulations.gov. The regulations.gov 

Web page will require you to provide 

your name and contact information. 

Your contact information will be 

viewable to DOE Building Technologies 

staff only. Your contact information will 

not be publicly viewable except for your 

first and last names, organization name 

(if any), and submitter representative 

name (if any). If your comment is not 

processed properly because of technical 

difficulties, DOE will use this 

information to contact you. If DOE 

cannot read your comment due to 

technical difficulties and cannot contact 

you for clarification, DOE may not be 

able to consider your comment. 

However, your contact information 

will be publicly viewable if you include 

it in the comment or in any documents 

attached to your comment. Any 

information that you do not want to be 

publicly viewable should not be 

included in your comment, nor in any 

document attached to your comment. 

Persons viewing comments will see only 

first and last names, organization 

names, correspondence containing 

comments, and any documents 

submitted with the comments. 

Do not submit to regulations.gov 

information for which disclosure is 

restricted by statute, such as trade 

secrets and commercial or financial 

information (hereinafter referred to as 

Confidential Business Information 

(CBI)). Comments submitted through 

regulations.gov cannot be claimed as 

CBI. Comments received through the 

Web site will waive any CBI claims for 

the information submitted. For 

information on submitting CBI, see the 

Confidential Business Information 

section. 

DOE processes submissions made 

through regulations.gov before posting. 

Normally, comments will be posted 

within a few days of being submitted. 

However, if large volumes of comments 

are being processed simultaneously, 

your comment may not be viewable for 

up to several weeks. Please keep the 

comment tracking number that 

regulations.gov provides after you have 

successfully uploaded your comment. 

Submitting comments via email, hand 

delivery, or mail. Comments and 

documents submitted via email, hand 

delivery, or mail also will be posted to 

regulations.gov. If you do not want your 

personal contact information to be 

publicly viewable, do not include it in 

your comment or any accompanying 

documents. Instead, provide your 

contact information on a cover letter. 

Include your first and last names, email 

address, telephone number, and 

optional mailing address. The cover 

letter will not be publicly viewable as 

long as it does not include any 

comments. 

Include contact information each time 

you submit comments, data, documents, 

and other information to DOE. If you 

submit via mail or hand delivery, please 

provide all items on a CD, if feasible. It 

is not necessary to submit printed 

copies. No facsimiles (faxes) will be 

accepted. 

Comments, data, and other 

information submitted to DOE 

electronically should be provided in 

PDF (preferred), Microsoft Word or 

Excel, WordPerfect, or text (ASCII) file 

format. Provide documents that are 

written in English, free of any defects or 

viruses, and not secured. Documents 

should not contain special characters or 

any form of encryption and, if possible, 

they should carry the electronic 

signature of the author. 

Campaign form letters. Please submit 

campaign form letters by the originating 

organization in batches of between 50 to 

500 form letters per PDF or as one form 

letter with a list of supporters’ names 

compiled into one or more PDFs. This 

reduces comment processing and 

posting time. 

Confidential Business Information. 

According to 10 CFR 1004.11, any 

person submitting information that he 

or she believes to be confidential and 

exempt by law from public disclosure 

should submit via email, postal mail, or 

hand delivery two well-marked copies: 

one copy of the document marked 

confidential including all the 

information believed to be confidential, 

and one copy of the document marked 

non-confidential with the information 

believed to be confidential deleted. 

Submit these documents via email or on 

a CD, if feasible. DOE will make its own 

determination about the confidential 

status of the information and treat it 

according to its determination. 

Factors of interest to DOE when 

evaluating requests to treat submitted 

information as confidential include: (1) 

A description of the items; (2) whether 

and why such items are customarily 

treated as confidential within the 

industry; (3) whether the information is 

generally known by or available from 

other sources; (4) whether the 

information has previously been made 

available to others without obligation 

concerning its confidentiality; (5) an 

explanation of the competitive injury to 

the submitting person which would 

result from public disclosure; (6) when 

such information might lose its 

confidential character due to the 

passage of time; and (7) why disclosure 

of the information would be contrary to 

the public interest. 

It is DOE’s policy that all comments 

may be included in the public docket, 

without change and as received, 

including any personal information 

provided in the comments (except 

information deemed to be exempt from 

public disclosure). 

B. Issues on Which DOE Seeks Comment 

Although DOE welcomes comments 

on any aspect of this proposal, DOE is 

particularly interested in receiving 

comments and views of interested 

parties concerning the following issues: 

1. DOE requests comment on its 

characterization of the modes of 

operation (active, standby, and off 

modes) that apply to LED lamps. 

2. DOE requests comment on the 

proposal for an equal number of lamps 

to be operated in the base-up and basedown orientations during lumen output, 

input power, CCT, CRI, lifetime, and 

standby mode testing. 

3. DOE invites interested parties to 

comment on the proposal to require all 

photometric values, including lumen 

output, CCT, and CRI, be measured by 

an integrating sphere (via photometer or 

spectroradiometer) and that goniometer 

systems must not be used. 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2

Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 106 / Tuesday, June 3, 2014 / Proposed Rules 32045 

4. DOE invites interested parties to 

comment on the proposal to remain 

consistent with section 4.0 of IES LM– 

79–2008, which indicates no seasoning 

is required for LED lamps before 

beginning photometric measurements. 

5. DOE requests comments on the test 

conditions when lamps are operating 

but no measurements are being taken. 

Specifically, DOE requests comment on 

requiring ambient temperature to be 

controlled between 15 °C and 40 °C; the 

minimization of vibration, shock, and 

air movement, as well as the 

requirement for adequate lamp spacing; 

the proposal to adopt the section 3.1 of 

IES LM–79–2008 requirements for both 

AC and DC power supplies; and the 

requirement that input voltage be 

monitored and regulated to within ±2.0 

percent of the rated RMS voltage as 

specified in section 5.3 of IES LM–65– 

2010. 

6. DOE requests comment on the 

proposed test method for CRI. 

7. DOE requests comment on the 

proposed calculation for lamp efficacy. 

8. For lifetime testing, DOE proposes 

to continuously operate the LED lamp 

and requests feedback on the 

appropriateness of not requiring an 

operating cycle during lumen 

maintenance testing. 

9. DOE requests comment on the 

proposed equation to project the L70

lifetime of LED lamps. 

10. DOE requests comment on the 

revision to the definition of ‘‘basic 

model’’ to address LED lamps. 

11. DOE requests comment on the 

appropriateness of adopting a minimum 

sample size of 10 LED lamps for input 

power, lumen output, CCT, CRI, 

lifetime, and standby mode. 

12. DOE requests comment on the 

proposal to allow measurements 

collected for the ENERGY STAR 

Program Requirements for Lamps (Light 

Bulbs): Eligibility Criteria—Version 1.0 

to be used for calculating reported 

values of lumen output, input power, 

lamp efficacy, CCT, CRI, and lifetime. 

13. DOE requests comment on the 

proposal to round CCT values for 

individual units to the tens place; and 

the proposal to round the certified CCT 

values for the sample to the hundreds 

place. 

14. DOE requests comment on its 

proposal to require accreditation by 

NVLAP or an entity recognized by ILAC, 

and on the costs and benefits associated 

with laboratory accreditation. 

15. DOE requests comment on the 

estimated number of entities that would 

be affected by the proposed rulemaking 

and the number of these companies that 

are ‘‘small businesses.’’ 

16. DOE requests comments on its 

analysis of initial setup and labor costs 

as well as the average annual burden for 

conducting testing of LED lamps. 

VI. Approval of the Office of the 

Secretary 

The Secretary of Energy has approved 

publication of this proposed rule. 

List of Subjects 

10 CFR Part 429 

Confidential business information, 

Energy conservation, Household 

appliances, Imports, Reporting and 

recordkeeping requirements. 

10 CFR Part 430 

Administrative practice and 

procedure, Confidential business 

information, Energy conservation, 

Household appliances, Imports, 

Incorporation by reference, 

Intergovernmental relations, Small 

businesses. 

Issued in Washington, DC, on May 16, 

2014. 

Kathleen B. Hogan, 

Deputy Assistant Secretary for Energy 

Efficiency, Energy Efficiency and Renewable 

Energy. 

For the reasons stated in the 

preamble, DOE is proposing to amend 

parts 429 and 430 of Chapter II of Title 

10, Subchapter D of the Code of Federal 

Regulations to read as set forth below: 

PART 429—CERTIFICATION, 

COMPLIANCE, AND ENFORCEMENT 

FOR CONSUMER PRODUCTS AND 

COMMERCIAL AND INDUSTRIAL 

EQUIPMENT 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 429 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 6291–6317. 

§ 429.12 [Amended] 

■ 2. Section 429.12(b)(13) is amended 

by removing ‘‘429.54’’ and adding 

‘‘429.69’’ in its place. 

■ 3. Section 429.56 is added to read as 

follows: 

§ 429.56 Integrated light-emitting diode 

lamps. 

(a) Determination of Represented 

Value. (1) Manufacturers must 

determine the represented value, which 

includes the certified rating, for each 

basic model of integrated light-emitting 

diode lamps by testing, in conjunction 

with the following sampling provisions: 

(i) Units to be tested. (A) The general 

requirements of § 429.11(a) are 

applicable except that the sample must 

be comprised of production units; and 

(B) For each basic model of integrated 

light-emitting diode lamp, the minimum 

number of units tested shall be no less 

than 10 and the same units must be 

used for testing all metrics. If more than 

10 units are tested as part of the sample, 

the total number of units must be a 

multiple of two. For each basic model, 

a sample of sufficient size shall be 

randomly selected and tested to ensure 

that: 

(1) Represented values of initial 

lumen output, lifetime, lamp efficacy, 

and color rendering index (CRI) of a 

basic model for which consumers would 

favor higher values must be less than or 

equal to the lower of: 

(i) The mean of the sample, where: 

and, x ̄ is the sample mean; n is the 

number of units; and xi is the ith unit; 

Or, 

(ii) The lower 99 percent confidence 

limit (LCL) of the true mean divided by 

0.97 for initial lumen output, life, and 

lifetime; the lower 99 percent 

confidence limit (LCL) of the true mean 

divided by 0.98 for lamp efficacy; and 

the lower 99 percent confidence limit 

(LCL) of the true mean divided by 0.99 

for CRI, where: 

and, x ̄ is the sample mean; s is the 

sample standard deviation; n is the 

number of samples; and t0.99 is the t 

statistic for a 99 percent one-tailed 

confidence interval with n ¥1 degrees 

of freedom (from Appendix A of this 

part). 

(2) Represented values of input power 

and standby mode power of a basic 

model for which consumers would favor 

lower values must be greater than or 

equal to the higher of: 

(i) The mean of the sample, where: 

and, x ̄ is the sample mean; n is the 

number of units; and xi is the ith unit; 

Or, 

(ii) The upper 99 percent confidence 

limit (UCL) of the true mean divided by 

1.01, where: 

and, x ̄ is the sample mean; s is the 

sample standard deviation; n is the 

number of samples; and t0.99 is the t 

statistic for a 99 percent one-tailed 

confidence interval with n ¥ 1 degrees 


mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2EP03JN14.015</GPH> EP03JN14.016</GPH> EP03JN14.017</GPH> EP03JN14.018</GPH>
32046 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 106 / Tuesday, June 3, 2014 / Proposed Rules 

of freedom (from Appendix A of this 

part); 

(3) Represented values of correlated 

color temperature (CCT) of a basic 

model must be equal to the mean of the 

sample, where: 

and, x ̄ is the sample mean; n is the 

number of units; and xi is the ith unit. 

(ii) [Reserved] 

(2) [Reserved] 

(b) [Reserved] 

(c) Rounding requirements for 

representative values, including 

certified and rated values, of lumen 

output, input power, efficacy, CCT, CRI, 

lifetime, standby mode power, and 

estimated annual energy cost. (1) The 

represented value of input power must 

be rounded to the nearest tenth of a 

watt. 

(2) The represented value of lumen 

output must be rounded to three 

significant digits. 

(3) The represented value of lamp 

efficacy must be rounded to the nearest 

tenths place. 

(4) The represented value of 

correlated color temperature must be 

rounded to the nearest 100 Kelvin. 

(5) The represented value of color 

rendering index must be rounded to the 

nearest whole number. 

(6) The represented value of lifetime 

must be rounded to the nearest whole 

hour. 

(7) The represented value of standby 

mode power must be rounded to the 

nearest tenth of a watt. 

PART 430—ENERGY CONSERVATION 

PROGRAM FOR CONSUMER 

PRODUCTS 

■ 4. The authority citation for part 430 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 6291–6309; 28 U.S.C. 

2461 note. 

■ 5. Section 430.2 is amended by 

revising the definition of ‘‘Basic model’’ 

and adding in alphabetical order the 

definition of ‘‘Integrated light-emitting 

diode lamp’’ to read as follows: 

§ 430.2 Definitions. 

* * * * * 

Basic model means all units of a given 

type of covered product (or class 

thereof) manufactured by one 

manufacturer, having the same primary 

energy source, and which have 

essentially identical electrical, physical, 

and functional (or hydraulic) 

characteristics that affect energy 

consumption, energy efficiency, water 

consumption, or water efficiency; and 

(1) With respect to general service 

fluorescent lamps, general service 

incandescent lamps, and incandescent 

reflector lamps: Lamps that have 

essentially identical light output and 

electrical characteristics—including 

lumens per watt (lm/W) and color 

rendering index (CRI). 

(2) With respect to integrated lightemitting diode lamps: Lamps that have 

essentially identical light output and 

electrical characteristics—including 

lumens per watt (lm/W), color rendering 

index (CRI), correlated color 

temperature (CCT), and lifetime. 

(3) With respect to faucets and 

showerheads: Have the identical flow 

control mechanism attached to or 

installed within the fixture fittings, or 

the identical water-passage design 

features that use the same path of water 

in the highest flow mode. 

(4) With respect to furnace fans: Are 

marketed and/or designed to be 

installed in the same type of 

installation. 

* * * * * 

Integrated light-emitting diode lamp 

means an integrated LED lamp as 

defined in ANSI/IESNA RP–16 

(incorporated by reference; see § 430.3). 

* * * * * 

■ 6. Section 430.3 is amended by: 

■ a. Adding paragraphs (n)(8) and (n)(9); 

and 

■ b. Removing ‘‘and X’’ in paragraph 

(o)(4) and adding in its place, ‘‘X and 

BB’’ . 

The additions read as follows: 

§ 430.3 Materials incorporated by 

reference. 

* * * * * 

(n) IESNA. * * * 

(8) ANSI/IESNA RP–16–2010, 

Nomenclature and Definitions for 

Illuminating Engineering, approved 

October 15, 2005; IBR approved for 

§ 430.2. 

(9) IES LM–79–2008 (‘‘IES LM–79’’), 

Approved Method: Electrical and 

Photometric Measurements of SolidState Lighting Products, approved 

December 31, 2007; IBR approved for 

Appendix BB to subpart B of this part. 

* * * * * 

■ 7. Section 430.23 is amended by 

adding paragraph (dd) to read as 

follows: 

§ 430.23 Test procedures for the 

measurement of energy and water 

consumption. 

* * * * * 

(dd) Integrated light-emitting diode 

lamp. (1) The input power of an 

integrated light-emitting diode lamp 

must be measured in accordance with 

section 3 of Appendix BB of this 

subpart. Individual unit input power 

must be rounded to the nearest tenth of 

a watt. 

(2) The lumen output of an integrated 

light-emitting diode lamp must be 

measured in accordance with section 3 

of Appendix BB of this subpart. 

Individual unit lumen output must be 

rounded to three significant digits. 

(3) The lamp efficacy of an integrated 

light-emitting diode lamp must be 

calculated in accordance with section 3 

of Appendix BB of this subpart. 

Individual unit lamp efficacy must be 

rounded to the nearest tenths place. 

(4) The correlated color temperature 

of an integrated light-emitting diode 

lamp must be measured in accordance 

with section 3 of Appendix BB of this 

subpart. Individual unit correlated color 

temperature must be rounded to the 

nearest 10 Kelvin. 

(5) The color rendering index of an 

integrated light-emitting diode lamp 

must be measured in accordance with 

section 3 of Appendix BB of this 

subpart. Individual unit color rendering 

index must be rounded to the nearest 

whole number. 

(6) The lifetime of an integrated lightemitting diode lamp must be measured 

in accordance with section 5 of 

Appendix BB of this subpart. Individual 

unit lifetime must be rounded to the 

nearest hour. 

(7) The life of an integrated lightemitting diode lamp must be calculated 

by dividing the represented rated 

lifetime (see 10 CFR 429.56) by the 

estimated annual operating hours as 

specified in 16 CFR 305.15(b)(3)(iii). 

The life must be rounded to the nearest 

tenth of a year. 

(8) The estimated annual energy cost 

for an integrated light-emitting diode 

lamp, expressed in dollars per year, 

must be the product of the average input 

power in kilowatts as determined in 

accordance with Appendix BB to this 

subpart, an electricity cost rate as 

specified in 16 CFR 305.15(b)(1)(ii), and 

an estimated average annual use as 

specified in 16 CFR 305.15(b)(1)(ii). The 

resulting estimated annual energy cost 

for an individual unit must be rounded 

to the nearest cent per year. 

(9) The standby mode power must be 

measured in accordance with section 5 

of Appendix BB of this subpart. 

Individual unit standby mode power 

must be rounded to the nearest tenth of 

a watt. 

■ 8. Section 430.25 is revised to read as 

follows: 

§ 430.25 Laboratory Accreditation 

Program. 

(a) Testing for general service 

fluorescent lamps, general service 


mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2EP03JN14.019</GPH>
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 106 / Tuesday, June 3, 2014 / Proposed Rules 32047 

incandescent lamps, and incandescent 

reflector lamps must be performed in 

accordance with Appendix R to this 

subpart. Testing for medium base 

compact fluorescent lamps must be 

performed in accordance with 

Appendix W to this subpart. Testing for 

fluorescent lamp ballasts must be 

performed in accordance with 

Appendix Q1 to this subpart. This 

testing, with the exception of lifetime 

testing of general service incandescent 

lamps, must be conducted by test 

laboratories accredited by the National 

Voluntary Laboratory Accreditation 

Program (NVLAP) or an accrediting 

organization recognized by International 

Laboratory Accreditation Cooperation 

(ILAC). NVLAP is a program of the 

National Institute of Standards and 

Technology, U.S. Department of 

Commerce. NVLAP standards for 

accreditation of laboratories that test are 

set forth in 15 CFR part 285. The 

following metrics should be measured 

by test laboratories accredited by 

NVLAP or an accrediting organization 

recognized by International Laboratory 

Accreditation Cooperation (ILAC): 

(1) Fluorescent lamp ballasts: ballast 

luminous efficiency (BLE); 

(2) General service fluorescent lamps: 

lamp efficacy, color rendering index; 

(3) General service incandescent 

reflector lamps: lamp efficacy; 

(4) General service incandescent 

lamps: lamp efficacy; and 

(5) Medium base compact fluorescent 

lamps: initial efficacy, lamp life. Testing 

for BLE may also be conducted by 

laboratories accredited by Underwriters 

Laboratories or Council of Canada. 

Testing for fluorescent lamp ballasts 

performed in accordance with 

Appendix Q to this subpart is not 

required to be conducted by test 

laboratories accredited by NVLAP or an 

accrediting organization recognized by 

NVLAP. 

(b) Testing of integrated light-emitting 

diode lamps must be performed in 

accordance with Appendix BB of this 

subpart. Testing must be conducted in 

test laboratories accredited by NVLAP 

or an accrediting organization 

recognized by International Laboratory 

Accreditation Cooperation (ILAC) for 

the following metrics: input power, 

lumen output, lamp efficacy, correlated 

color temperature, color rendering 

index, lifetime, and standby mode 

power. A manufacturer’s own 

laboratory, if accredited, may conduct 

the testing. 

■ 9. Appendix BB to subpart B of part 

430 is added to read as follows: 

Appendix BB to Subpart B of Part 430— 

Uniform Test Method for Measuring the 

Input Power, Lumen Output, Lamp 

Efficacy, Correlated Color Temperature 

(CCT), Color Rendering Index (CRI), 

Lifetime, and Standby Mode Power of 

Integrated Light-Emitting Diode (LED) 

Lamps 

Note: After [DATE 180 DAYS AFTER 

PUBLICATION OF FINAL RULE IN THE 

Federal Register], any representations made 

with respect to the energy use or efficiency 

of light-emitting diode lamps must be made 

in accordance with the results of testing 

pursuant to this appendix. Given that after 

[DATE 180 DAYS AFTER PUBLICATION OF 

FINAL RULE IN THE Federal Register] 

representations with respect to the energy 

use or efficiency of light-emitting diode 

lamps must be made in accordance with tests 

conducted pursuant to this appendix, 

manufacturers may wish to begin using this 

test procedure as soon as possible. 

1. Scope: This appendix specifies how to 

measure input power, lumen output, lamp 

efficacy, CCT, CRI, lifetime, and standby 

mode power for integrated LED lamps. 

2. Definitions 

2.1. The definitions specified in section 1.3 

of IES LM–79 except section 1.3(f) 

(incorporated by reference; see § 430.3) 

apply. 

2.2. Initial lumen output means the 

measured lumen output after the lamp is 

initially energized and stabilized using the 

stabilization procedures in section 3 of 

Appendix BB of this subpart. 

2.3. Rated input voltage means the 

voltage(s) marked on the lamp as the 

intended operating voltage. If not marked on 

the lamp, assume 120 V. 

2.4. Lamp efficacy means the ratio of 

measured initial lumen output in lumens to 

the measured lamp input power in watts, in 

units of lumens per watt. 

2.5. CRI means color rendering index as 

defined in § 430.2. 

2.6. Test duration means the operating 

time of the LED lamp after the initial lumen 

output measurement and before, during, and 

including the final lumen output 

measurement. 

2.7. Lifetime means the time at which the 

lumen output is equal to 70 percent of the 

initial lumen output measured using section 

4 of Appendix BB of this subpart. 

3. Active Mode Test Method for Determining 

Lumen Output, Input Power, CCT, CRI, and 

Lamp Efficacy 

In cases where there is a conflict, the 

language of the test procedure in this 

appendix takes precedence over IES LM–79 

(incorporated by reference; see § 430.3). 

3.1. Test Conditions and Setup 

3.1.1. The ambient conditions, power 

supply, electrical settings, and 

instrumentation must be established in 

accordance with the specifications in 

sections 2.0, 3.0, 7.0, and 8.0 of IES LM–79 

(incorporated by reference; see § 430.3), 

respectively. 

3.1.2. An equal number of integrated LED 

lamps must be positioned in the base up and 

base down orientations throughout testing. 

3.1.3. The integrated LED lamp must be 

operated at the rated voltage throughout 

testing. For an integrated LED lamp with 

multiple rated voltages including 120 volts, 

the integrated LED lamp must be operated at 

120 volts. If an integrated LED lamp with 

multiple rated voltages is not rated for 120 

volts, the integrated LED lamp must be 

operated at the highest rated input voltage. 

Additional tests may be conducted at other 

rated voltages. 

3.1.4. The integrated LED lamp must be 

operated at maximum input power. If 

multiple modes occur at the same maximum 

input power (such as variable CCT or CRI), 

the manufacturer can select any of these 

modes for testing; however, all measurements 

described in section 3 and section 4 must be 

taken at the same selected mode. 

3.2. Test Method, Measurements, and 

Calculations 

3.2.1. The integrated LED lamp must be 

stabilized prior to measurement as specified 

in section 5.0 of IES LM–79 (incorporated by 

reference; see § 430.3). The stabilization 

variation is calculated as 

[maximum¥minimum)/minimum] of at least 

three readings of the input power and lumen 

output over a period of 30 minutes, taken 15 

minutes apart. 

3.2.2. The input power in watts must be 

measured as specified in section 8.0 of IES 

LM–79 (incorporated by reference; see 

§ 430.3). 

3.2.3. Lumen output must be measured as 

specified in section 9.1 and 9.2 of IES LM– 

79 (incorporated by reference; see § 430.3). 

Goniometers must not be used. 

3.2.4. CCT must be determined according 

to the method specified in section 12.0 of IES 

LM–79 (incorporated by reference; see 

§ 430.3) with the exclusion of section 12.2 of 

IES LM–79. Goniometers must not be used. 

3.2.5. CRI must be determined according to 

the method specified in section 12.0 of IES 

LM–79 (incorporated by reference; see 

§ 430.3) with the exclusion of section 12.2 of 

IES LM–79. Goniometers must not be used. 

3.2.6. Lamp efficacy must be determined 

by dividing measured initial lumen output by 

the measured input power. 

4. Active Mode Test Method for Lifetime 

In cases where there is a conflict, the 

language of the test procedure in this 

appendix takes precedence over IES LM–79 

(incorporated by reference; see § 430.3). 

4.1. Measure Initial Lumen Output. Measure 

the Initial Lumen Output According to 

Section 3 of This Appendix 

4.2. Test Duration. Operate the integrated 

LED lamp for a period of time (the test 

duration) after the initial lumen output 

measurement and before, during, and 

including the final lumen output 

measurement. 

4.2.1. There is no minimum test duration 

requirement for the integrated LED lamp. The 

test duration is selected by the manufacturer. 

See section 4.5.3 for instruction on the 

maximum lifetime. 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2

32048 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 106 / Tuesday, June 3, 2014 / Proposed Rules 

4.2.2. The test duration only includes time 

when the integrated LED lamp is energized 

and operating. 

4.2.3. Operating conditions and setup 

during the test duration other than time 

during which lumen output measurements 

are being conducted are specified in section 

4.3 of this appendix. 

4.3. Operating Conditions and Setup Between 

Lumen Output Measurements 

4.3.1. Ambient temperature must be 

controlled between 15 °C and 40 °C. 

4.3.2. The integrated LED lamps must be 

spaced to allow airflow around each lamp. 

4.3.3. The integrated LED lamps must not 

be subjected to excessive vibration or shock 

during lamp operation. 

4.3.4. Line voltage waveshape must be as 

described in section 3.1 of IES LM–79 

(incorporated by reference; see § 430.3). 

4.3.5. Input voltage must be monitored and 

regulated to within ±2 percent of the voltage 

required in section 3.1.3 for the duration of 

the test. 

4.3.6. Electrical settings must be as 

described in section 7.0 IES LM–79 

(incorporated by reference; see § 430.3). 

4.3.7. An equal number of integrated LED 

lamps must be positioned in the base up and 

base down orientations throughout testing. 

4.3.8. The integrated LED lamp must be 

operated at maximum input power. If 

multiple modes occur at the same maximum 

input power (such as variable CCT and CRI), 

the manufacturer can select any of these 

modes for testing. Measurements of all 

quantities described in sections 3 and 4 of 

this appendix must be taken at the same 

selected mode. 

4.4. Measure Final Lumen Output. Measure 

the lumen output at the end of the test 

duration according to section 3. 

4.5.Calculate Lumen Maintenance and 

Lifetime 

4.5.1. Calculate the lumen maintenance of 

the lamp after the test duration ‘‘t’’ by 

dividing the final lumen output ‘‘xt’’ by the 

initial lumen output ‘‘x0’’. Initial and final 

lumen output must be measured in 

accordance with sections 4.1 and 4.4 of this 

appendix, respectively. 

4.5.2. For lumen maintenance values 

greater than 1, the lifetime (in hours) is 

limited to a value less than or equal to four 

times the test duration. 

4.5.3. For lumen maintenance values less 

than 1 but greater than or equal to 0.7, the 

lifetime (in hours) is calculated using the 

following equation: 

Where: t is the test duration in hours; x0 is 

the initial lumen output; xt is the final 

lumen output at time t, and ln is the 

natural logarithm function. 

The maximum lifetime is limited to four 

times the test duration t. 

4.5.4. For lumen maintenance values less 

than 0.7, including lamp failures that result 

in complete loss of light output, lifetime is 

equal to the previously recorded lumen 

output measurement at a shorter test duration 

where the lumen maintenance is greater than 

or equal to 70 percent, and lifetime shall not 

be calculated in accordance with section 

4.5.3 of this appendix. 

5. Standby Mode Test Method for 

Determining Standby Mode Power 

In cases where there is a conflict, the 

language of the test procedure in this 

appendix takes precedence over IES LM–79 

(incorporated by reference; see § 430.3) and 

IEC 62301 (incorporated by reference; see 

§ 430.3). 

5.1. Test Conditions and Setup 

5.1.1. The ambient conditions, power 

supply, electrical settings, and 

instrumentation must be established in 

accordance with the specifications in 

sections 2.0, 3.0, 7.0, and 8.0 of IES LM–79 

(incorporated by reference; see § 430.3), 

respectively. 

5.1.2. An equal number of integrated LED 

lamps must be positioned in the base up and 

base down orientations throughout testing. 

5.1.3. The integrated LED lamp must be 

operated at the rated voltage throughout 

testing. For an integrated LED lamp with 

multiple rated voltages, the integrated LED 

lamp must be operated at 120 volts. If an 

integrated LED lamp with multiple rated 

voltages is not rated for 120 volts, the 

integrated LED lamp must be operated at the 

highest rated input voltage. 

5.2. Test Method, Measurements, and 

Calculations 

5.2.1. Standby mode power consumption 

must be measured for integrated LED lamps 

if applicable. 

5.2.2. The integrated LED lamp must be 

stabilized prior to measurement as specified 

in section 5.0 of IES LM–79 (incorporated by 

reference; see § 430.3). The stabilization 

variation is calculated as [maximum— 

minimum)/minimum] of at least three 

readings of the input power and lumen 

output over a period of 30 minutes, taken 15 

minutes apart. 

5.2.3. The integrated LED must be 

configured in standby mode by sending a 

signal to the integrated LED lamp instructing 

it to have zero light output. 

5.2.4. The standby mode power in watts 

must be measured as specified in section 5 

of IEC 62301 (incorporated by reference; see 

§ 430.3). 

[FR Doc. 2014–12127 Filed 6–2–14; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6450–01–P 


mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2EP03JN14.020</GPH>