Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 49 / Wednesday, March 13, 2013 / Proposed Rules 15891 

A also issued under 5 U.S.C. 552. Subpart B 

also issued under 5 U.S.C. 552a. 

■ 2. Add new paragraph 70 at the end 

of Appendix C to part 5 to read as 

follows: 

Appendix C to Part 5—DHS Systems of 

Records Exempt From the Privacy Act 

* * * * * 

70. The DHS/CBP–018–Customs—Trade 

Partnership Against Terrorism (C–TPAT) 

System of Records consists of electronic and 

paper records and will be used by DHS and 

its components. The DHS/CBP–018– 

Customs—Trade Partnership Against 

Terrorism (C–TPAT) System of Records is a 

repository of information held by DHS in 

connection with its several and varied 

missions and functions, including, but not 

limited to the enforcement of civil and 

criminal laws; investigations, inquiries, and 

proceedings thereunder; and national 

security activities. The DHS/CBP–018– 

Customs—Trade Partnership Against 

Terrorism (C–TPAT) System of Records 

contains information that is collected by, on 

behalf of, in support of, or in cooperation 

with DHS and its components and may 

contain personally identifiable information 

collected by other federal, state, local, tribal, 

foreign, or international government 

agencies. CBP will not assert any exemption 

with respect to information requested from 

and provided by the C–TPAT applicant 

including, but not limited to, company 

profile, supply chain information and other 

information provided during the application 

and validation process. CBP will not assert 

any exemptions for an individual’s 

application data and final membership 

determination in response to a request from 

that individual. However, the Privacy Act 

requires DHS to maintain an accounting of 

the disclosures made pursuant to all routines 

uses. Disclosing the fact that a law 

enforcement agency has sought particular 

records may affect ongoing law enforcement 

activities. As such, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 

552a(j)(2), the Secretary of Homeland 

Security has exempted this system from 

sections (c)(3), (e)(8), and (g) of the Privacy 

Act of 1974, as amended, as is necessary and 

appropriate to protect this information. 

Further, DHS will claim exemption from 

section (c)(3) of the Privacy Act of 1974, as 

amended, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 552a(k)(2) as 

is necessary and appropriate to protect this 

information. Pursuant to exemption 5 U.S.C. 

552a(j)(2) of the Privacy Act, all other C– 

TPAT data, including information regarding 

the possible ineligibility of an applicant for 

C–TPAT membership discovered during the 

vetting process and any resulting issue 

papers, are exempt from 5 U.S.C. 552a(c)(3) 

and (4); (d); (e)(1), (e)(2), (e)(3), (e)(4)(G), 

(e)(4)(H), (e)(4)(I), (e)(5) and (e)(8); (f), and (g). 

Pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 552a(k)(2), information 

regarding the possible ineligibility of an 

applicant for C–TPAT membership 

discovered during the vetting process and 

any resulting issue papers are exempt 5 

U.S.C. 552a(c)(3); (d); (e)(1), (e)(4)(G), 

(e)(4)(H),(e)(4)(I); and (f). Exemptions from 

these particular subsections are justified, on 

a case-by-case basis to be determined at the 

time a request is made, for the following 

reasons: 

(a) From subsection (c)(3) and (4) 

(Accounting for Disclosures) because release 

of the accounting of disclosures could alert 

the subject of an investigation of an actual or 

potential criminal, civil, or regulatory 

violation to the existence of that investigation 

and reveal investigative interest on the part 

of DHS as well as the recipient agency. 

Disclosure of the accounting would therefore 

present a serious impediment to law 

enforcement efforts and/or efforts to preserve 

national security. Disclosure of the 

accounting would also permit the individual 

who is the subject of a record to impede the 

investigation, to tamper with witnesses or 

evidence, and to avoid detection or 

apprehension, which would undermine the 

entire investigative process. 

(b) From subsection (d) (Access to Records) 

because access to the records contained in 

this system of records could inform the 

subject of an investigation of an actual or 

potential criminal, civil, or regulatory 

violation to the existence of that investigation 

and reveal investigative interest on the part 

of DHS or another agency. Access to the 

records could permit the individual who is 

the subject of a record to impede the 

investigation, to tamper with witnesses or 

evidence, and to avoid detection or 

apprehension. Amendment of the records 

could interfere with ongoing investigations 

and law enforcement activities and would 

impose an unreasonable administrative 

burden by requiring investigations to be 

continually reinvestigated. In addition, 

permitting access and amendment to such 

information could disclose security-sensitive 

information that could be detrimental to 

homeland security. 

(c) From subsection (e)(1) (Relevancy and 

Necessity of Information) because in the 

course of investigations into potential 

violations of federal law, the accuracy of 

information obtained or introduced 

occasionally may be unclear, or the 

information may not be strictly relevant or 

necessary to a specific investigation. In the 

interests of effective law enforcement, it is 

appropriate to retain all information that may 

aid in establishing patterns of unlawful 

activity. 

(d) From subsection (e)(2) (Collection of 

Information from Individuals) because 

requiring that information be collected from 

the subject of an investigation would alert the 

subject to the nature or existence of the 

investigation, thereby interfering with that 

investigation and related law enforcement 

activities. 

(e) From subsection (e)(3) (Notice to 

Subjects) because providing such detailed 

information could impede law enforcement 

by compromising the existence of a 

confidential investigation or reveal the 

identity of witnesses or confidential 

informants. 

(f) From subsections (e)(4)(G), (e)(4)(H), 

and (e)(4)(I) (Agency Requirements) and (f) 

(Agency Rules), because portions of this 

system are exempt from the individual access 

provisions of subsection (d) for the reasons 

noted above, and therefore DHS is not 

required to establish requirements, rules, or 

procedures with respect to such access. 

Providing notice to individuals with respect 

to existence of records pertaining to them in 

the system of records or otherwise setting up 

procedures pursuant to which individuals 

may access and view records pertaining to 

themselves in the system would undermine 

investigative efforts and reveal the identities 

of witnesses, and potential witnesses, and 

confidential informants. 

(g) From subsection (e)(5) (Collection of 

Information) because with the collection of 

information for law enforcement purposes, it 

is impossible to determine in advance what 

information is accurate, relevant, timely, and 

complete. Compliance with subsection (e)(5) 

would preclude DHS agents from using their 

investigative training and exercise of good 

judgment to both conduct and report on 

investigations. 

(h) From subsection (e)(8) (Notice on 

Individuals) because compliance would 

interfere with DHS’s ability to obtain, serve, 

and issue subpoenas, warrants, and other law 

enforcement mechanisms that may be filed 

under seal and could result in disclosure of 

investigative techniques, procedures, and 

evidence. 

(i) From subsection (g) (Civil Remedies) to 

the extent that the system is exempt from 

other specific subsections of the Privacy Act. 

Dated: February 22, 2013. 

Jonathan R. Cantor, 

Acting Chief Privacy Officer, Department of 

Homeland Security. 

[FR Doc. 2013–05673 Filed 3–12–13; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 9111–14–P 

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY 

10 CFR Part 430 

[Docket No. EERE–2011–BT–NOA–0013] 

Energy Conservation Program: Data 

Collection and Comparison With 

Forecasted Unit Sales of Five Lamp 

Types 

AGENCY: Office of Energy Efficiency and 

Renewable Energy, Department of 

Energy. 

ACTION: Notice of data availability. 

SUMMARY: The U.S. Department of 

Energy (DOE) is informing the public of 

its collection of shipment data and 

creation of spreadsheet models to 

provide comparisons between actual 

and benchmark estimate unit sales of 

five lamp types (i.e., rough service 

lamps, vibration service lamps, 3-way 

incandescent lamps, 2,601–3,300 lumen 

general service incandescent lamps, and 

shatter-resistant lamps), which are 

currently exempt from energy 

conservation standards. As the actual 

sales do not exceed the forecasted 

estimate by 100 percent for any lamp 

type (i.e., the threshold triggering a 

rulemaking for an energy conservation 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
15892 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 49 / Wednesday, March 13, 2013 / Proposed Rules 

1The notices and related documents for the 2008 

analysis, 2010 comparison, 2011 comparison, and 

this NODA are available through the DOE Web site 

at: http://www1.eere.energy.gov/buildings/ 

appliance_standards/product.aspx/productid/63. 

standard for that lamp type has not been 

exceeded), DOE has determined that no 

regulatory action is necessary at this 

time. However, DOE will continue to 

track sales data for these exempted 

lamps. Relating to this activity, DOE has 

prepared, and is making available on its 

Web site, a spreadsheet showing the 

comparisons of anticipated versus 

actual sales, as well as the model used 

to generate the original sales estimates. 

ADDRESSES: The spreadsheet is available 

online: http://www1.eere.energy.gov/ 

buildings/appliance_standards/ 

product.aspx/productid/63. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. 

Lucy deButts, U.S. Department of 

Energy, Office of Energy Efficiency and 

Renewable Energy, Building 

Technologies, EE–2J, 1000 

Independence Avenue SW., 

Washington, DC 20585–0121. 

Telephone: (202) 287–1604. Email: 

five_lamp_types@ee.doe.gov. 

Mr. Eric Stas, U.S. Department of 

Energy, Office of the General Counsel, 

GC–71, 1000 Independence Avenue 

SW., Washington, DC 20585–0121. 

Telephone: (202) 586–9507. Email: 

Eric.Stas@hq.doe.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Table of Contents 

I. Background 

II. Definitions 

A. Rough Service Lamps 

B. Vibration Service Lamps 

C. Three-Way Incandescent Lamps 

D. 2,601–3,300 Lumen General Service 

Incandescent Lamps 

E. Shatter-Resistant Lamps 

III. Comparison Methodology 

IV. Comparison Results 

A. Rough Service Lamps 

B. Vibration Service Lamps 

C. Three-Way Incandescent Lamps 

D. 2,601–3,300 Lumen General Service 

Incandescent Lamps 

E. Shatter-Resistant Lamps 

V. Conclusion 

I. Background 

The Energy Independence and 

Security Act of 2007 (EISA 2007; Pub. 

L. 110–140) was enacted on December 

19, 2007. Among the requirements of 

subtitle B (Lighting Energy Efficiency) of 

title III of EISA 2007 were provisions 

directing DOE to collect, analyze, and 

monitor unit sales of five lamp types 

(i.e., rough service lamps, vibration 

service lamps, 3-way incandescent 

lamps, 2,601–3,300 lumen general 

service incandescent lamps, and shatterresistant lamps). In relevant part, 

section 321(a)(3)(B) of EISA 2007 

amended section 325(l) of the Energy 

Policy and Conservation Act of 1975 

(EPCA) by adding paragraph (4)(B), 

which generally directs DOE, in 

consultation with the National Electrical 

Manufacturers Association (NEMA), to: 

(1) Collect unit sales data for each of the 

five lamp types for calendar years 1990 

through 2006 in order to determine the 

historical growth rate for each lamp 

type; and (2) construct a model for each 

of the five lamp types based on 

coincident economic indicators that 

closely match the historical annual 

growth rates of each lamp type to 

provide a neutral comparison 

benchmark estimate of future unit sales. 

(42 U.S.C. 6295(l)(4)(B)) Section 

321(a)(3)(B) of EISA 2007 also amends 

section 325(l) of EPCA by adding 

paragraph (4)(C), which, in relevant 

part, directs DOE to collect unit sales 

data for calendar years 2010 through 

2025, in consultation with NEMA, for 

each of the five lamp types. DOE must 

then compare the actual lamp sales in 

that year with the benchmark estimate, 

determine if the unit sales projection 

has been exceeded, and issue the 

findings within 90 days after the end of 

the analyzed calendar year. (42 U.S.C. 

6295(l)(4)(C)) 

On December 18, 2008, DOE issued a 

notice of data availability (NODA) for 

the Report on Data Collection and 

Estimated Future Unit Sales of Five 

Lamp Types (hereafter the ‘‘2008 

analysis’’), which was published in the 

Federal Register on December 24, 2008. 

73 FR 79072. The 2008 analysis 

presented the 1990 through 2006 

shipment data collected in consultation 

with NEMA, the spreadsheet model 

DOE constructed for each lamp type, 

and the benchmark unit sales estimates 

for 2010 through 2025. On April 4, 

2011, DOE published a NODA in the 

Federal Register (hereafter the ‘‘2010 

comparison’’) announcing the 

availability of updated spreadsheet 

models presenting the benchmark 

estimates from the 2008 analysis and the 

collected sales data from 2010 for the 

first annual comparison. 76 FR 18425. 

Similarly, DOE published another 

NODA in the Federal Register on March 

20, 2012 (hereafter the ‘‘2011 

comparison’’) announcing the updated 

spreadsheet models and 2011 sales data 

related to the second annual 

comparison. 77 FR 16183. Today’s 

NODA presents the third annual 

comparison; specifically, section IV of 

this report compares the actual unit 

sales against benchmark unit sales 

estimates for 2012.1

EISA 2007 also amends section 325(l) 

of EPCA by adding paragraphs (4)(D) 

through (4)(H) which state that if DOE 

finds that the unit sales for a given lamp 

type in any year between 2010 and 2025 

exceed the benchmark estimate of unit 

sales by at least 100 percent (i.e., more 

than double the anticipated sales), then 

DOE must take regulatory action to 

establish an energy conservation 

standard for such lamps. (42 U.S.C. 

6295(l)(4)(D)–(H)) For 2,601–3,300 

lumen general service incandescent 

lamps, DOE must adopt a statutorilyprescribed energy conservation 

standard, and for the other four types of 

lamps, the statute requires DOE to 

initiate an accelerated rulemaking to 

establish energy conservation standards. 

If the Secretary does not complete the 

accelerated rulemakings within one year 

of the end of the previous calendar year, 

there is a ‘‘backstop requirement’’ for 

each lamp type, which would establish 

energy conservation standard levels and 

related requirements by statute. Id. 

As in the 2008 analysis and previous 

comparisons, DOE uses manufacturer 

shipments as a surrogate for unit sales 

in this NODA because manufacturer 

shipment data are tracked and 

aggregated by the trade organization, 

NEMA. DOE believes that annual 

shipments track closely with actual unit 

sales of these five lamp types, as DOE 

presumes that retailer inventories 

remain constant from year to year. DOE 

believes this is a reasonable assumption 

because the markets for these five lamp 

types have existed for many years, 

thereby enabling manufacturers and 

retailers to establish appropriate 

inventory levels that reflect market 

demand. Furthermore, in the long-run, 

unit sales could not increase in any one 

year without manufacturer shipments 

increasing either that year or the 

following one. In either case, increasing 

unit sales must eventually result in 

increasing manufacturer shipments. 

This is the same methodology presented 

in DOE’s 2008 analysis, 2010 

comparison, and 2011 comparison, and 

the Department did not receive any 

comments challenging this assumption 

or the general approach. 

II. Definitions 

A. Rough Service Lamps 

Section 321(a)(1)(B) of EISA 2007 

amended section 321(30) of EPCA by 

adding the definition of a ‘‘rough service 

lamp.’’ The statutory definition reads as 

follows: ‘‘The term ‘rough service lamp’ 

means a lamp that—(i) has a minimum 

of 5 supports with filament 

configurations that are C–7A, C–11, C– 

17, and C–22 as listed in Figure 6–12 of 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 49 / Wednesday, March 13, 2013 / Proposed Rules 15893 

2 ‘‘General service incandescent lamp’’ is defined 

as a standard incandescent or halogen type lamp 

that—(I) Is intended for general service 

applications; (II) has a medium screw base; (III) has 

a lumen range of not less than 310 lumens and not 

more than 2,600 lumens; and (IV) is capable of 

being operated at a voltage range at least partially 

within 110 and 130 volts. (42 U.S.C. 6291(30)(D)). 

3The Federal Trade Commission issued the lamp 

labeling requirements in 1994 (see 59 FR 25176 

(May 13, 1994)). Further amendments were made to 

the lamp labeling requirements in 2007 (see 16 CFR 

305.15(b); 72 FR 49948, 49971–72 (August 29, 

2007)). The package must display the lamp’s light 

output (in lumens), energy use (in watts), and lamp 

life (in hours). 

4NSF/ANSI 51 applies specifically to materials 

and coatings used in the manufacturing of 

equipment and objects destined for contact with 

foodstuffs. 

the 9th edition of the IESNA 

[Illuminating Engineering Society of 

North America] Lighting handbook, or 

similar configurations where lead wires 

are not counted as supports; and (ii) is 

designated and marketed specifically for 

‘rough service’ applications, with—(I) 

the designation appearing on the lamp 

packaging; and (II) marketing materials 

that identify the lamp as being for rough 

service.’’ (42 U.S.C. 6291(30)(X)) 

As noted above, rough service 

incandescent lamps must have a 

minimum of five filament support wires 

(not counting the two connecting leads 

at the beginning and end of the 

filament), and must be designated and 

marketed for ‘‘rough service’’ 

applications. This type of incandescent 

lamp is typically used in applications 

where the lamp would be subject to 

mechanical shock or vibration while it 

is operating. Standard incandescent 

lamps have only two support wires 

(which also serve as conductors), one at 

each end of the filament coil. When 

operating (i.e., when the tungsten 

filament is glowing so hot that it emits 

light), a standard incandescent lamp’s 

filament is brittle, and rough service 

applications could cause it to break 

prematurely. To address this problem, 

lamp manufacturers developed lamp 

designs that incorporate additional 

support wires along the length of the 

filament to ensure that it has support 

not just at each end, but at several other 

points as well. The additional support 

protects the filament during operation 

and enables longer operating life for 

incandescent lamps in rough service 

applications. Typical applications for 

these rough service lamps might include 

commercial hallways and stairwells, 

gyms, storage areas, and security areas. 

B. Vibration Service Lamps 

Section 321(a)(1)(B) of EISA 2007 

amended section 321(30) of EPCA by 

adding the definition of a ‘‘vibration 

service lamp.’’ The statutory definition 

reads as follows: ‘‘The term ‘vibration 

service lamp’ means a lamp that—(i) has 

filament configurations that are C–5, C– 

7A, or C–9, as listed in Figure 6–12 of 

the 9th Edition of the IESNA Lighting 

Handbook or similar configurations; (ii) 

has a maximum wattage of 60 watts; (iii) 

is sold at retail in packages of 2 lamps 

or less; and (iv) is designated and 

marketed specifically for vibration 

service or vibration-resistant 

applications, with—(I) the designation 

appearing on the lamp packaging; and 

(II) marketing materials that identify the 

lamp as being vibration service only.’’ 

(42 U.S.C. 6291(30)(AA)) 

The statute mentions three examples 

of filament configurations for vibration 

service lamps in Figure 6–12 of the 

IESNA Lighting Handbook, one of 

which (i.e., C–7A) is also listed in the 

statutory definition of ‘‘rough service 

lamp.’’ The definition of ‘‘vibration 

service lamp’’ requires that such lamps 

have a maximum wattage of 60 watts 

and be sold at a retail level in packages 

of two lamps or fewer. Similar to rough 

service lamps, vibration service lamps 

must be designated and marketed for 

vibration service or vibration-resistant 

applications. As the name suggests, this 

type of incandescent lamp is generally 

used in applications where the 

incandescent lamp would be subject to 

a continuous low level of vibration, 

such as in a ceiling fan light kit. In such 

applications, standard incandescent 

lamps without additional filament 

support wires may not achieve the full 

rated life, because the filament wire is 

brittle and would be subject to breakage 

at typical operating temperature. To 

address this problem, lamp 

manufacturers typically use a more 

malleable tungsten filament to avoid 

damage and short circuits between coils. 

C. Three-Way Incandescent Lamps 

Section 321(a)(1)(B) of EISA 2007 

amended section 321(30) of EPCA by 

adding the definition of a ‘‘3-way 

incandescent lamp.’’ The statutory 

definition reads as follows: ‘‘The term 

‘3-way incandescent lamp’ includes an 

incandescent lamp that—(i) employs 2 

filaments, operated separately and in 

combination, to provide 3 light levels; 

and (ii) is designated on the lamp 

packaging and marketing materials as 

being a 3-way incandescent lamp.’’ (42 

U.S.C. 6291(30)(Y)) 

Three-way lamps are commonly 

found in wattage combinations such as 

50, 100, and 150 watts or 30, 70, and 

100 watts. These lamps use two 

filaments (e.g., a 30-watt and a 70-watt 

filament) and can be operated separately 

or together to produce three different 

lumen outputs (e.g., 305 lumens with 

one filament, 995 lumens with the 

other, or 1,300 lumens using the 

filaments together). When used in threeway sockets, these lamps allow users to 

control the light level. Three-way 

incandescent lamps are typically used 

in residential multi-purpose areas, 

where consumers may adjust the light 

level to be appropriate for the task they 

are performing. 

D. 2,601–3,300 Lumen General Service 

Incandescent Lamps 

The statute does not provide a 

definition of ‘‘2,601–3,300 Lumen 

General Service Incandescent Lamps’’; 

however, DOE is interpreting this term 

to be a general service incandescent 

lamp 2 that emits light between 2,601 

and 3,300 lumens. Lamps on the market 

that emit light within this lumen range 

are immediately recognizable because, 

as required by the Energy Policy Act of 

1992, Public Law 102–486, all general 

service incandescent lamps must be 

labeled with lamp lumen output.3 These 

lamps are used in general service 

applications when high light output is 

needed. 

E. Shatter-Resistant Lamps 

Section 321(a)(1)(B) of EISA 2007 

amended section 321(30) of EPCA by 

adding the definition of a ‘‘shatterresistant lamp, shatter-proof lamp, or 

shatter-protected lamp.’’ The statutory 

definition reads as follows: ‘‘The terms 

‘shatter-resistant lamp,’ ‘shatter-proof 

lamp,’ and ‘shatter-protected lamp’ 

mean a lamp that—(i) has a coating or 

equivalent technology that is compliant 

with [National Sanitation Foundation/ 

American National Standards Institute] 

NSF/ANSI 51 and is designed to contain 

the glass if the glass envelope of the 

lamp is broken; and (ii) is designated 

and marketed for the intended 

application, with—(I) the designation on 

the lamp packaging; and (II) marketing 

materials that identify the lamp as being 

shatter-resistant, shatter-proof, or 

shatter-protected.’’ (42 U.S.C. 

6291(30)(Z)) Although the definition 

provides three names commonly used to 

refer to these lamps, DOE simply refers 

to them collectively as ‘‘shatter-resistant 

lamps.’’ 

Shatter-resistant lamps incorporate a 

special coating designed to prevent glass 

shards from being dispersed if a lamp’s 

glass envelope breaks. Shatter-resistant 

lamps incorporate a coating compliant 

with industry standard NSF/ANSI 51,4

‘‘Food Equipment Materials,’’ and are 

labeled and marketed as shatterresistant, shatter-proof, or shatterprotected. Some types of the coatings 

can also protect the lamp from breakage 

in applications subject to heat and 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
15894 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 49 / Wednesday, March 13, 2013 / Proposed Rules 

5The least squares function is an analytical tool 

that DOE uses to minimize the sum of the squared 

residual differences between the actual historical 

data points and the modeled value (i.e., the linear 

curve fit). In minimizing this value, the resulting 

curve fit will represent the best fit possible to the 

data provided. 

6This selection is consistent with the 2010 and 

2011 comparisons. See DOE’s 2008 forecast 

spreadsheet models of the lamp types for greater 

detail of the estimates. 

thermal shock that may occur from 

water, sleet, snow, soldering, or 

welding. 

III. Comparison Methodology 

In the 2008 analysis, DOE reviewed 

each of the five sets of shipment data 

that were collected in consultation with 

NEMA and applied two curve fits to 

generate unit sales estimates for the five 

lamp types after calendar year 2006. 

One curve fit applied a linear regression 

to the historical data and extended that 

line into the future. The other curve fit 

applied an exponential growth function 

to the shipment data and projected unit 

sales into the future. For this 

calculation, linear regression treats the 

year as a dependent variable and 

shipments as the independent variable. 

The linear regression curve fit is 

modeled by minimizing the differences 

among the data points and the best 

curve-fit linear line using the least 

squares function.5 The exponential 

curve fit is also a regression function 

and uses the same least squares function 

to find the best fit. For some data sets, 

an exponential curve provides a better 

characterization of the historical data, 

and, therefore, a better projection of the 

future data. 

For 3-way incandescent lamps, 2,601– 

3,300 lumen general service 

incandescent lamps, and shatterresistant lamps, DOE found that the 

linear regression and exponential 

growth curve fits produced nearly the 

same estimates of unit sales (i.e., the 

difference between the two forecasted 

values was less than 1 or 2 percent). 

However, for rough service and 

vibration service lamps, the linear 

regression curve fit projected lamp unit 

sales would decline to zero for both 

lamp types by 2018. In contrast, the 

exponential growth curve fit projected a 

more gradual decline in unit sales, such 

that lamps would still be sold beyond 

2018, and it was, therefore, considered 

the more realistic forecast. While DOE 

was satisfied that either the linear 

regression or exponential growth 

spreadsheet model generated a 

reasonable benchmark unit sales 

estimate for 3-way incandescent lamps, 

2,601–3,300 lumen general service 

incandescent lamps, and shatterresistant lamps, DOE selected the 

exponential growth curve fit for these 

lamp types for consistency with the 

selection made for rough service and 

vibration service lamps.6 DOE examines 

the benchmark unit sales estimates and 

actual sales for each of the five lamp 

types in the following section and also 

makes the comparisons available in a 

spreadsheet online: http:// 

www1.eere.energy.gov/buildings/ 

appliance_standards/product.aspx/ 

productid/63. 

IV. Comparison Results 

A. Rough Service Lamps 

For rough service lamps, the 

exponential growth forecast projected 

the benchmark unit sales estimate for 

2012 to be 5,780,000 units. The NEMAprovided shipment data reported 

shipments of 6,045,000 rough service 

lamps in 2012. As this finding exceeds 

the estimate by only 4.6 percent, DOE 

will continue to track rough service 

lamp sales data and will not initiate 

regulatory action for this lamp type at 

this time. 

B. Vibration Service Lamps 

For vibration service lamps, the 

exponential growth forecast projected 

the benchmark unit sales estimate for 

2012 to be 3,019,000 units. The NEMAprovided shipment data reported 

shipments of 1,077,000 vibration service 

lamps in 2012. As this finding is only 

35.7 percent of the estimate, DOE will 

continue to track vibration service lamp 

sales data and will not initiate 

regulatory action for this lamp type at 

this time. 

C. Three-Way Incandescent Lamps 

For 3-way incandescent lamps, the 

exponential growth forecast projected 

the benchmark unit sales estimate for 

2012 to be 50,131,000 units. The NEMAprovided shipment data reported 

shipments of 28,854,000 3-way 

incandescent lamps in 2012. As this 

finding is only 57.6 percent of the 

estimate, DOE will continue to track 3- 

way incandescent lamp sales data and 

will not initiate regulatory action for 

this lamp type at this time. 

D. 2,601–3,300 Lumen General Service 

Incandescent Lamps 

For 2,601–3,300 lumen general 

service incandescent lamps, the 

exponential growth forecast projected 

the benchmark unit sales estimate for 

2012 to be 33,979,000 units. The NEMAprovided shipment data reported 

shipments of 12,373,000 2,601–3,300 

lumen general service incandescent 

lamps in 2012. As this finding is 36.4 

percent of the estimate, DOE will 

continue to track 2,601–3,300 lumen 

general service incandescent lamp sales 

data and will not initiate regulatory 

action for this lamp type at this time. 

E. Shatter-Resistant Lamps 

For shatter-resistant lamps, the 

exponential growth forecast projected 

the benchmark unit sales estimate for 

2012 to be 1,663,000 units. The NEMAprovided shipment data reported 

shipments of 1,455,000 shatter-resistant 

lamps in 2012. As this finding is only 

87.5 percent of the estimate, DOE will 

continue to track shatter-resistant lamp 

sales data and will not initiate 

regulatory action for this lamp type at 

this time. 

V. Conclusion 

None of the shipments for rough 

service lamps, vibration service lamps, 

3-way incandescent lamps, 2,601–3,300 

lumen general service incandescent 

lamps, or shatter-resistant lamps crossed 

the statutory threshold for a standard. 

DOE will monitor the situation for these 

five currently exempted lamp types and 

will reassess 2013 sales by March 31, 

2014, in order to determine whether an 

energy conservation standards 

rulemaking is required, consistent with 

42 U.S.C. 6295(l)(4)(D)–(H). 

Issued in Washington, DC, on March 5, 

2013. 

Kathleen B. Hogan, 

Deputy Assistant Secretary for Energy 

Efficiency, Energy Efficiency and Renewable 

Energy. 

[FR Doc. 2013–05770 Filed 3–12–13; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6450–01–P 

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND 

HUMAN SERVICES 

Food and Drug Administration 

21 CFR Part 117 

[Docket No. FDA–2012–N–1258] 

Draft Qualitative Risk Assessment of 

Risk of Activity/Food Combinations for 

Activities (Outside the Farm Definition) 

Conducted in a Facility Co-Located on 

a Farm; Availability; Reopening of the 

Comment Period 

AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, 

HHS. 

ACTION: Notification; reopening of the 

comment period. 

SUMMARY: The Food and Drug 

Administration (FDA or ‘‘we’’) is 

reopening the comment period for a 

document entitled ‘‘Draft Qualitative 

Risk Assessment of Risk of Activity/ 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS