[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 250 (Monday, December 31, 2012)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 76959-76972]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2012-31396]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

10 CFR Part 430

[Docket Number EERE-2010-BT-PET-0047]
RIN 1904-AC57


Energy Conservation Program: Request for Exclusion of 100 Watt 
R20 Short Incandescent Reflector Lamp From Energy Conservation 
Standards

AGENCY: Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, Department of 
Energy.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NOPR).

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The Energy Policy and Conservation Act of 1975 (EPCA), as 
amended, prescribes energy conservation standards for various consumer 
products and certain commercial and industrial equipment, including 
incandescent reflector lamps (IRLs). The U.S. Department of Energy 
(DOE) received a petition from the National Electrical Manufacturers 
Association requesting the initiation of a rulemaking to exclude from 
coverage under EPCA standards a certain type of IRL marketed for use in 
pool and spa applications. Specifically, the lamp at issue is a 100-
watt R20 short (having a maximum overall length of 3 and \5/8\ or 3.625 
inches) IRL (``R20 short lamp''). DOE published this petition and a 
request for comment in the Federal Register on December 23, 2010. From 
its evaluation of the petition and careful consideration of the public 
comments, DOE decided to grant the petition for rulemaking. DOE 
published a request for information in the Federal Register on 
September 8, 2011. Based on the comments received and additional data 
gathered by DOE, DOE proposes to exclude R20 short lamps from coverage 
under the EPCA energy conservation standards.

DATES: DOE will accept comments, data, and information regarding this 
NOPR no later than March 1, 2013. See section 0 Public Participation 
for details.

ADDRESSES: Any comments submitted must identify the NOPR for Energy 
Conservation Standards for R20 Short Lamps, and provide docket number 
EERE-2010-BT-PET-0047 and/or regulatory information number (RIN) number 
1904-AC57. 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: [email protected]. 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 Program, Mailstop EE-2J, 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, in which case it is not necessary to 
include printed copies.
    Written comments regarding the burden-hour estimates or other 
aspects of collection-of-information requirements may be submitted to 
Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy through the methods 
listed above and by email to [email protected].
    For detailed instructions on submitting comments and additional 
information on the rulemaking process, see section 0 of this document 
(Public Participation).
    Docket: The docket is available for review at www.regulations.gov, 
including Federal Register notices, comments, and other supporting 
documents/materials. All documents in the docket are listed in the 
www.regulations.gov index. However, not all documents listed in the 
index may be publicly available, such as information that is exempt 
from public disclosure.
    The regulations.gov Web page will contain simple instructions on 
how to access all documents, including public comments, in the docket. 
See section 0 for more information on how to submit comments through 
www.regulations.gov.
    For further information on how to submit a comment or review other 
public comments and the docket, contact Ms. Brenda Edwards at (202) 
586-2945 or by email: [email protected].

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. Lucy deButts, U.S. Department of 
Energy, Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, Building 
Technologies Program, EE-2J, 1000 Independence Avenue SW., Washington, 
DC 20585-0121. Telephone: (202) 287-1604. Email: 
[email protected].
    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: [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Table of Contents

I. Summary of the Rulemaking
II. Introduction
    A. Authority
    B. Background
III. Determination of R20 Short Lamp Exclusion
    A. Authority
    B. R20 Short Lamp Special Application Design and Impact on 
Energy Savings
    1. Special Application of R20 Short Lamps
    2. Impact on Energy Savings
    C. Availability of R20 Short Lamp Special Characteristics in 
Substitutes
    1. Special Characteristics of R20 Short Lamps
    2. Reasonable Substitutes with R20 Short Lamp Special 
Characteristics
    D. Conclusion
    E. Options for Conditional Exclusions
IV. Procedural Issues and Regulatory Review

[[Page 76960]]

    A. Review Under Executive Orders 12866 and 13563
    B. Review Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act
    C. Review Under the Paperwork Reduction Act
    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 the Treasury and General Government 
Appropriations Act, 2001
    K. Review Under Executive Order 13211
    L. Review Under the Information Quality Bulletin for Peer Review
V. Public Participation
    A. Submission of Comments
    B. Issues on Which DOE Seeks Comment
VI. Approval of the Office of the Secretary

I. Summary of the Rulemaking

    The Energy Policy and Conservation Act of 1975 (EPCA; 42 U.S.C. 
6291 et seq.), as amended, prescribes energy conservation standards for 
various consumer products and certain commercial and industrial 
equipment, including incandescent reflector lamps (IRLs). The National 
Electrical Manufacturers Association (NEMA) has petitioned the U.S. 
Department of Energy (DOE) to undertake a rulemaking to exclude from 
coverage under energy conservation standards a certain type of IRL that 
is marketed for use in pool and spa applications. Specifically, the 
lamp at issue is a 100-watt (W) R20 \1\ short (having a maximum overall 
length [MOL] of 3 and \5/8\ [or 3.625] inches) lamp that falls within 
the voltage range of covered IRLs (hereafter ``R20 short lamp''). 75 FR 
80731 (Dec. 23, 2010). In this notice of proposed rulemaking (NOPR), 
DOE considers whether R20 short lamps should be excluded from coverage 
under the applicable energy conservation standards for IRLs. Such a 
review is authorized under 42 U.S.C. 6291(30)(E), which allows the 
Secretary, by rule, to exclude from the terms ``fluorescent lamp'' and 
``incandescent lamp'' any lamp for which standards would not result in 
significant energy savings because such lamp is designed for special 
applications or has special characteristics not available in reasonably 
substitutable lamp types.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ ``R'' denotes a reflector lamp type, and ``20'' denotes 
diameter in \1/8\ inch increments, which translates to 2.5 inches.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Accordingly, DOE has assessed the impact of the application of R20 
short lamps on the potential energy savings from energy conservation 
standards for these lamps. The characteristics of R20 short lamps, as 
well as their distribution channels and marketing, indicate that they 
are designed for pool and spa applications. DOE determined that because 
the R20 short lamps serve a very small market, they will result in 
insignificant energy savings from the applicable conservation 
standards.
    Additionally, DOE analyzed the characteristics of R20 short lamps 
to determine if they were available in reasonably substitutable lamp 
types. Because the most likely substitute lamp required a modification 
to the fixture lens in order to maintain the same light distribution, 
DOE has tentatively concluded that no currently commercially available 
lamp can serve as a reasonable substitute for the R20 short lamp.
    Therefore, under 42 U.S.C. 6291(30)(E), DOE proposes to exclude R20 
short lamps from coverage of energy conservation standards by modifying 
the definition of ``Incandescent reflector lamp'' and proposing a new 
definition for ``R20 short lamp'' in 10 CFR 430.2. Based on 
consideration of the public comments DOE receives in response to this 
notice and related information collected and analyzed during the course 
of this rulemaking effort, DOE may revise the proposal in this 
document.

II. Introduction

A. Authority

    Title III, Part B of EPCA (42 U.S.C. 6291-6309, as codified) 
established the Energy Conservation Program for Consumer Products Other 
Than Automobiles,\2\ a program covering most major household 
appliances. Subsequent amendments expanded Title III of EPCA to include 
additional consumer products and commercial and industrial equipment, 
including IRLs--the product that is the focus of this document.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ For editorial reasons, upon codification in the U.S. Code, 
Part B was redesignated Part A.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In particular, amendments to EPCA in the Energy Policy Act of 1992 
(EPAct 1992), Public Law 102-486, established energy conservation 
standards for certain classes of IRLs and authorized DOE to conduct two 
rulemaking cycles to determine whether those standards should be 
amended. (42 U.S.C. 6291(1), 6295(i)(1) and (3)-(4)) DOE completed the 
first cycle of amendments by publishing a final rule in July 2009 
(hereafter ``2009 Lamps Rule''). 74 FR 34080 (July 14, 2009).\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ Information regarding the 2009 Lamps Rule can be found at 
DOE's Building and Technologies Web page for Incandescent Reflector 
Lamps: http://www1.eere.energy.gov/buildings/appliance_standards/product.aspx/productid/58.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The EPAct 1992 amendments to EPCA also added as covered products 
certain IRLs with wattages of 40W or higher and established energy 
conservation standards for these IRLs. Section 322(a)(1) of the Energy 
Independence and Security Act of 2007 (EISA 2007), Public Law 110-140, 
subsequently expanded EPCA's definition of ``incandescent reflector 
lamp'' to include lamps with a diameter between 2.25 and 2.75 
inches.\4\ (42 U.S.C. 6291(30)(C)(ii)) This addition made R20 lamps 
(having a diameter of \20/8\, or 2.5, inches) covered products subject 
to EPCA's standards for IRLs.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ Prior to the enactment of EISA 2007, this definition applied 
to lamps with a diameter which exceeds 2.75 inches. EISA 2007 
modified this definition to make it applicable to IRLs with a 
diameter which exceeds 2.25 inches.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Although these lamps are covered products, 42 U.S.C. 6291(30)(E) 
gives DOE the authority to exclude these lamps upon a determination 
that standards ``would not result in significant energy savings because 
such lamp is designed for special applications or has special 
characteristics not available in reasonably substitutable lamp types.''

B. Background

    The Administrative Procedure Act (APA; 5 U.S.C. 551 et seq.), 
provides, among other things, that ``[e]ach agency shall give an 
interested person the right to petition for the issuance, amendment, or 
repeal of a rule.'' (5 U.S.C. 553(e)) Pursuant to this provision of the 
APA, NEMA petitioned DOE for a rulemaking to exclude a type of IRL from 
coverage of energy conservation standards. Specifically, NEMA sought 
exclusion for R20 short lamps marketed for use in pools and spas. These 
lamps are sold in jurisdictions that allow pools and spas to be 
supplied with 120V electricity. 75 FR 80731 (Dec. 23, 2010)
    As stated in the previous section 0, amendments to EPCA in EISA 
2007 expanded EPCA's definition of IRLs to include smaller diameter 
lamps, such as the R20 lamps that are the subject of this rulemaking. 
(42 U.S.C. 6291(30)(C)(ii)) The related statutory standards went into 
effect on June 15, 2008--180 days after the date of enactment of EISA 
2007. (42 U.S.C. 6295(i)(1)(D)(ii)) Although R20 short lamps were 
required to comply with these standards, noncompliant R20 short lamps 
remained on the market until September 2010 because the manufacturers 
of these lamps mistakenly believed the lamps were excluded from 
coverage. 75 FR at 80732 (Dec. 23, 2010). The manufacturers had relied 
upon the Federal Trade

[[Page 76961]]

Commission's (FTC's) labeling rule, 16 CFR part 305, which, until July 
19, 2011, published the previous lamp definitions from the EPAct 1992 
amendments of EPCA.\5\ Before July 19, 2011, the FTC labeling 
regulations treated IRLs as general service incandescent lamps (GSILs), 
and erroneously continued to define GSILs as not including lamps 
specifically designed for ``[s]wimming pool or other underwater 
service.'' 16 CFR 305.3(m)(3) (2010). This exclusion was eliminated 
from EPCA by section 321 of EISA 2007. Upon realization that the FTC 
definitions were incorrect and the R20 short lamps were subject to 
energy conservation standards, the manufacturers removed the product 
from the market. Subsequently, in November 2010, NEMA submitted its 
petition to exclude R20 short lamps from coverage under EPCA standards. 
DOE published the petition in the Federal Register on December 23, 
2010, and requested public comment. 75 FR 80731.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ The FTC published a final rule in the Federal Register on 
July 19, 2010, which updated its regulations regarding its 
definition of general service incandescent lamp to reflect the 
definitional changes provided in EISA 2007. 75 FR 41696, 41713-14. 
These changes were effective July 19, 2011, at which time the 
amendments were reflected in the Code of Federal Regulations.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In the petition, NEMA asked both for a rulemaking to exclude R20 
short lamps from coverage of energy conservation standards, and for a 
stay of enforcement pending that rulemaking. As grounds for the 
petition, NEMA stated that R20 short lamps qualify for exclusion under 
42 U.S.C. 6291(30)(E), which allows the Secretary to exclude a 
fluorescent or incandescent lamp ``as a result of a determination that 
standards for such lamp would not result in significant energy savings 
because such lamp is designed for special applications or has special 
characteristics not available in reasonably substitutable lamp types.'' 
In its petition, NEMA contended that a rulemaking would find that 
energy conservation standards for R20 short lamps would not result in 
significant energy savings and that the lamp was designed for special 
applications or has special characteristics not available in substitute 
lamp types. Specifically, as the lamp has a particular MOL and is 
specially designed to meet underwater illumination requirements of pool 
and spa manufacturers (including designated beam spread and lumen 
output), there are no substitute products on the market for this 
application. 75 FR at 80732 (Dec. 23, 2010).
    Additionally, NEMA asserted that having energy conservation 
standards for this lamp type would lead to its unavailability in the 
United States. To the best of NEMA's and manufacturers' knowledge, the 
decision of the two manufacturers of R20 short lamps to withdraw the 
product from the market has already resulted in its current 
unavailability. 75 FR at 80732-33 (Dec. 23, 2010).
    DOE received several comments on the petition from manufacturers, 
utilities, and environmental and energy efficiency organizations.\6\ 
After reviewing NEMA's petition and all comments, DOE concluded it has 
the legal authority to grant exclusions for IRLs under 42 U.S.C. 
6291(30)(E) and initiated a rulemaking to make a determination on 
exclusion. DOE granted NEMA's petition for a rulemaking in a request 
for information (RFI) published in the Federal Register on September 8, 
2011, announcing its decision and requesting more information on this 
product. 76 FR 55609. The RFI stated that DOE granted the petition for 
a rulemaking pursuant to the requirements specified in section 
6291(30)(E), and would also grant a stay of enforcement pending the 
outcome of the rulemaking. In the RFI, DOE also specifically asked for 
comment on (1) the potential for unregulated R20 short lamps to be used 
as substitutes for other lamps subject to energy conservation 
standards; (2) whether the distinctive features, pricing, and 
application-specific labeling and marketing of R20 short lamps provide 
a sufficient deterrent to their use in other applications; (3) the 
availability of substitute lamps that would meet both energy 
conservation standards and relevant pool and spa application 
requirements; and (4) the technological feasibility of R20 short lamps 
complying with the prescribed energy conservation standards and also 
meeting relevant pool and spa application requirements. 76 FR at 55614.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ NEMA's petition and associated comments can be found at 
regulations.gov under Docket No. EERE-2010-BT-PET-0047.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    DOE received comments in response to the RFI from utilities and 
environmental and energy efficiency organizations.\7\ The following 
section addresses these comments.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ The RFI and associated comments can also be found at 
regulations.gov under Docket No. EERE-2010-BT-PET-0047.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

III. Determination of R20 Short Lamp Exclusion

A. Authority

    In response to the RFI, DOE received comments from interested 
parties regarding DOE's authority to exclude R20 short lamps under 42 
U.S.C. 6291(30)(E). Earthjustice and National Resources Defense Council 
(hereafter ``Earthjustice and NRDC'') reiterated their previous comment 
made in response to NEMA's petition that section 6291(30)(E) can only 
apply to lamps for which significant energy savings would not be 
captured under future standards; the language of the provision (i.e., 
``would not result'') does not permit DOE to apply it retroactively to 
lamps with existing standards. (Earthjustice and NRDC, No. 8 at p. 1) 
\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ A notation in the form ``Earthjustice and NRDC, No. 8 at p. 
1'' identifies a written comment that DOE has received and has 
included in the docket of this rulemaking. This particular notation 
refers to a comment: (1) Submitted by the Earthjustice and NRDC; (2) 
in document number 8 of the docket; and (3) on page 1 of that 
document.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As stated in the RFI, DOE does not believe the plain language of 
section 6291(30)(E) compels an interpretation that the section only 
applies to standards before their compliance date. DOE finds this 
reading would prevent application of section 6291(30)(E). Under 42 
U.S.C. 6295(o)(3), DOE is already barred from adopting standards for 
any product for which the standards would not result in significant 
conservation of energy. Therefore, if interpreted to apply to products 
for which standards are not yet in effect, section 6291(30)(E) would be 
rendered redundant and superfluous, as both it and section 6295(o)(3) 
would evaluate potential energy savings from future standards. Instead, 
DOE concluded in the RFI that section 6291(30)(E) contains no time bar 
for undertaking a rulemaking action to address a lamp for which 
standards would not result in significant energy savings because it is 
designed for special applications or has special characteristics not 
available in substitutable lamp types. Given the broad and growing 
coverage of DOE's energy conservation standards for lamps, DOE believes 
that Congress intended section 6291(30)(E) to provide a mechanism to 
address both those lamps inadvertently covered by existing standards, 
as well as new lamps subsequently developed to which standards would 
otherwise apply. 76 FR at 55611 (Sept. 8, 2011).
    Earthjustice and NRDC disagreed that section 6291(30)(E) would be 
redundant if not applicable to standards that already require 
compliance. Earthjustice

[[Page 76962]]

and NRDC commented that section 6291(30)(E) retains a separate 
relevance from section 6295(o)(3) because it enables DOE to exclude 
lamps from statutory standards that do not yet apply whereas section 
6295(o)(3) only applies to DOE's adoption of standards via rulemakings. 
(Earthjustice and NRDC, No. 8 at pp. 1-2)
    The language in section 6291(30)(E) does not explicitly condition 
exclusions from coverage of standards based on the authority under 
which the standards were developed. Interpreting section 6291(30)(E) as 
applying to only statutory standards in order to distinguish it from 
section 6295(o)(3) would limit the scope of section 6291(30)(E). The 
language in section 6291(30)(E) does not indicate that it was 
Congress's intent to limit the Secretary's authority of exemption. 
Therefore, DOE preliminarily concludes it has the authority under 
section 6291(30)(E) to consider excluding R20 short lamps from energy 
conservation standards. DOE assessed whether the lamps qualify for 
exclusion under each criteria set forth in that section.

B. R20 Short Lamp Special Application Design and Impact on Energy 
Savings

1. Special Application of R20 Short Lamps
a. R20 Short Lamp Design for Special Applications
    NEMA's original petition stated that the R20 short lamp was 
specifically designed to meet the underwater illumination requirements 
of pool and spa part manufacturers. NEMA stated that the R20 short 
lamp's MOL, heat shield, filament, lumen output, and beam spread 
indicate the lamp was specifically designed for its application. 75 FR 
at 80733 (Dec. 23, 2010) Through interviews with lamp manufacturers and 
pool and spa part manufacturers, DOE was able to confirm that the R20 
short lamp's MOL of 3 and \5/8\ inches is required for compatibility 
with pool and spa fixtures; the heat shield is necessary for operation 
in a high temperature environment; and the lumen output range between 
637 and 1022 lumens, and beam spread between 70 and 123 degrees are 
designed to satisfy consumer preferences as well as building codes and 
standards. DOE determined that the filament in R20 short lamps is 
specifically placed to achieve the required beam spread. Therefore, DOE 
has tentatively concluded that filament placement does not stand on its 
own as a requirement for pools and spas, but is rather encompassed 
within the requirement for a specific beam spread. Because the 
described R20 short lamp characteristics are designed to meet 
requirements specific to pools and spas, DOE believes that R20 short 
lamps are designed for a special application. For more discussion on 
DOE's analysis of R20 short lamp features, see section 0.
b. Marketing and Distribution Channels of R20 Short Lamps
    In addition to design features, DOE also analyzed distribution 
channels and marketing literature for R20 short lamps. NEMA commented 
that along with R20 short lamps' design characteristics, their 
application-specific marketing and specialty distribution methods deter 
any use in other applications. (NEMA, No. 7 at p. 1) DOE found R20 
short lamps are marketed and clearly packaged in a way that indicates 
the lamps are specifically for pool and spa use. Through lamp 
manufacturer interviews and research conducted by DOE using publicly 
available information, DOE found that R20 short lamp manufacturers do 
not sell lamps directly to consumers. The commercial market is supplied 
through catalog warehouses, maintenance supply, maintenance, repair, 
operations (MRO) distributors, and pool and spa distributors. The 
residential market is primarily supplied through pool and spa 
distributors, which include large retail pool outlets and online 
retailers. Additionally, a small portion of products are sold to online 
retailers for pool and spa replacement parts, electrical distributors 
for direct installation in new pool construction, and hospitality and 
specialty lighting suppliers (e.g., medical equipment retail) for use 
with pools and spas.
    Given the preceding information, DOE tentatively concludes that the 
non-traditional distribution channels and application-specific 
packaging indicates R20 short lamps are designed for pool and spa 
applications. Combined with the application-specific characteristics 
described in the previous section, DOE preliminary concludes that R20 
short lamps are designed for a special application and therefore 
fulfill the special application condition in section 6291(30)(E).
2. Impact on Energy Savings
    As mentioned in the previous sections, under 42 U.S.C. 6291(30)(E), 
DOE may determine to exclude a fluorescent or incandescent lamp 
provided standards for the lamp would not result in significant energy 
savings because the lamp is designed for special applications. As 
stated in section 0, DOE preliminarily concluded that certain features 
of R20 short lamps and manufacturers' use of specialty distribution 
channels and application-specific marketing indicate that R20 short 
lamps are designed for a special application. Given that R20 short 
lamps met this criterion, DOE then considered the impact on energy 
savings from regulation of R20 short lamps.
    NEMA commented that R20 short lamps have a minimal potential for 
energy savings because of low sales and operating hours due to their 
use in specialty task lighting rather than in general applications. 
(NEMA, No. 7 at p. 2) As part of its analysis, DOE evaluated the market 
share of R20 short lamps put forth by NEMA. In its petition, NEMA 
stated there are only two known manufacturers of the 100W R20 short 
lamp in the United States. Both manufacturers submitted their 
confidential R20 short lamps 2009 shipment data to NEMA. In interviews, 
these lamp manufacturers commented that the shipment data from 2009 is 
representative of the R20 short lamp market before they stopped making 
the lamp available to consumers in 2010. For comparison, NEMA used an 
adjusted estimate of covered IRL shipments from the 2009 Lamps Rule. In 
the 2009 Lamps Rule, DOE estimated the shipments of covered IRLs to be 
181 million units in the year 2005. Based on a decline in shipments of 
all IRLs in 2009, NEMA assumed covered IRLs would also decline, but 
estimated the shipments to still remain above 100 million. Based on a 
minimum of 100 million and a maximum of 181 million shipments of 
covered IRLs, NEMA calculated that the shipments of R20 short lamps 
represented significantly less than 0.1 percent of 2009 shipments of 
covered IRLs. 75 FR at 80733 (Dec. 23, 2010).
    DOE independently obtained shipment information from lamp 
manufacturers that confirmed NEMA's estimate of R20 short lamps being 
significantly less than 0.1 percent of 2009 shipments of covered IRLs. 
Therefore, DOE determined this to be an accurate assessment of the R20 
short lamp market share and concluded that less than 0.1 percent of 
covered IRLs indicated a small market share for R20 short lamps. (More 
information on R20 short lamp energy use can be found in appendix 
B.\9\)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ Appendices can be found on DOE's Building and Technologies 
Web page for Incandescent Reflector Lamps under Standards section 
via the Technical Support Document link: http://www1.eere.energy.gov/buildings/appliance_standards/product.aspx/productid/58.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    DOE also analyzed the potential for market migration of R20 short 
lamps. Pacific Gas and Electric Company, Southern California Gas 
Company, San Diego Gas and Electric, and Southern California Edison 
(hereafter ``CA

[[Page 76963]]

Utilities'') commented that consumers are likely to substitute R20 
short lamps in other IRL applications because the price is not 
significantly higher than other residential IRLs. CA Utilities added 
that if production of R20 short lamps increased, the price could 
decrease further due to economies of scale. (CA Utilities, No. 9 at pp. 
1-2) NEMA disagreed, stating that R20 short lamps have a high price 
point of $15.88 and therefore would be unlikely to be used as a 
substitute for general service lamps. (NEMA, No. 7 at p. 2)
    DOE received information from lamp manufacturers stating that the 
end-user price varies, but typically ranges from $12 to $25. DOE 
research confirmed this large variation, finding prices ranging from as 
low as $2 to as high as $25. DOE acknowledges that the price of R20 
short lamps can be competitive with other IRLs. Even with low prices, 
however, substitution of R20 short lamps in general applications is 
unlikely as consumers are unable to purchase R20 short lamps at typical 
retail outlets such as large home improvement stores. In interviews, 
lamp manufacturers stated that the R20 short lamp market is primarily 
for replacement lamps and, therefore, historically had shown very 
little growth or decay. Further, despite lamp manufacturers never 
previously considering the lamps as regulated, the market share has 
remained extremely low and there has been no indication of market 
migration. Therefore, DOE has preliminarily concluded that the R20 
short lamp market has limited potential for growth and it is unlikely 
the lamps will migrate to general lighting applications.
    CA Utilities also cited the R20 short lamp MOL as a reason for 
potential market migration, stating that there are commercially 
available lamps that have the same shortened 3 and \5/8\ inches MOL as 
the R20 short lamp and are used in other lighting applications. CA 
Utilities concluded that the presence of these other short lamps 
indicated significant energy savings would be at risk because length 
would not prevent the use of R20 short lamps in other applications. (CA 
Utilities, No. 9 at p. 1) Earthjustice and NRDC agreed with CA 
Utilities and added that the potential use of R20 short lamps in 
applications other than pools and spas demonstrated that R20 short 
lamps could become a low cost alternative to compliant IRLs. 
(Earthjustice and NRDC, No. 8 at p. 2) As noted in section 0, the 
majority of R20 short lamps are purchased from pool and spa 
distributors and specialty retail stores, and are not available where 
general service IRLs are typically sold. R20 short lamps are also 
marketed and clearly packaged in a way that indicates the lamps are 
specifically for pool and spa use. Because of the limited distribution 
channels and specific marketing of R20 short lamps, DOE has tentatively 
concluded their use in general lighting applications is unlikely.
    Because the specialty application of the R20 short lamps results in 
a small market share and limited potential for growth for these lamps, 
DOE determined that the regulation of R20 short lamps would not result 
in significant energy savings. For these same reasons, DOE has also 
tentatively concluded that the exclusion of R20 short lamps would not 
significantly impact the energy savings resulting from energy 
conservation standards. DOE requests comment on its assessment of the 
potential energy savings from standards for R20 short lamps.

C. Availability of R20 Short Lamp Special Characteristics in 
Substitutes

    DOE may also exclude a lamp type because its special 
characteristics are not available in reasonably substitutable lamp 
types. 42 U.S.C. 6291(30)(E) To determine whether an exclusion was also 
acceptable based on this second condition, DOE ascertained whether 
special characteristics of R20 short lamps are available in reasonable 
substitutes. The following sections detail DOE's analysis, which 
consisted of identifying the special characteristics of R20 short lamps 
and determining whether these characteristics existed in other lamp 
types that would qualify as reasonable substitutes.
1. Special Characteristics of R20 Short Lamps
    As discussed in section 0, DOE received comments that the R20 short 
lamps' shortened MOL, heat shield, specially engineered filament, and 
lamp performance (including a wide beam spread and high lumen output) 
indicate that the lamp was designed specifically for pool and spa 
applications. Therefore, DOE evaluated these lamp characteristics to 
determine if they should be considered as necessary in potential 
substitute lamps. DOE considered a lamp characteristic special if, 
without it, the R20 short lamp would not be able to provide the special 
application for which it was designed (i.e. use in pools and spas). 
Therefore, even if the lamp characteristic was not unique to the R20 
short lamp, it was deemed special if it was required for the lamp to 
function in pools and spas. DOE identified a set of features that in 
combination allow the lamp to be used in a specialty application.
    Beyond the characteristics mentioned above, DOE did not find any 
other R20 short lamp feature that should be considered a necessary 
special characteristic. DOE requests comments on any additional 
characteristics, other than those identified, that should be considered 
special characteristics.
a. Shortened MOL
    The R20 short lamp has a MOL of 3 and \5/8\ inches. NEMA stated 
that this shortened MOL is a distinct characteristic that allows the 
lamp to fit the fixture dimensions in pool and spa applications. 75 FR 
at 80732 (Dec. 23, 2010). CA Utilities disagreed and stated that the 
descriptor ``short'' is not a unique size distinction because many 
small diameter reflector lamps have MOLs less than or equal to 3 and 
\5/8\ inches despite not being marketed as ``short.'' (CA Utilities, 
No. 3 at p. 2)
    DOE notes that there are currently several lamps in the marketplace 
that are labeled as short lamps, but are not designed for specific 
applications. These commercially available lamps have the same 
shortened MOL of 3 and \5/8\ inches as the R20 short lamp and can be 
used in various general service lighting applications. This indicates 
that the desired MOL is a common feature available in other lamp types. 
However, DOE considers the shortened MOL a special characteristic of 
the R20 short lamp because it is necessary for use of the lamp in a 
fixture used in pool or spa applications. As stated by NEMA and 
confirmed with spa lamp manufacturers, the shortened MOL allows the 
lamp to fit inside pool and spa fixtures. Therefore, while a shortened 
MOL is not unique to R20 short lamps, without this feature, the lamp 
could not be used for the special application it was designed. In 
combination with the lamp's other special characteristics, the 
shortened MOL allows the lamp to be used in a specialty application.
b. Heat Shield
    DOE received comments that the heat shield in the R20 short lamp 
was a special characteristic that is required to prevent high heat from 
damaging the cement that joins the glass envelope and base. 75 FR at 
80732 (Dec. 23, 2010). Heat shields are metal rings constructed of 
either aluminum or steel and located in the narrow portion of the 
reflector below the filament. In lamp manufacturer interviews, DOE 
learned that heat shields are used to reflect radiant energy away from 
the lamp base. DOE further confirmed with lamp manufacturers that 
because of the high operating temperatures of pools and

[[Page 76964]]

spas, a heat shield is a necessary feature in R20 short lamps that 
allow them to be used in these environments. After surveying the 
market, DOE notes that heat shields may be included in lamps used in 
environments other than pools and spas. In particular, DOE received 
manufacturer feedback that heat shields are often routinely added to 
reflector lamps to prevent seal failure. However, because heat shields 
are a necessary component in order for the R20 short lamp to be used in 
pools and spas, DOE considers it to be a special characteristic of the 
R20 short lamp. In combination with the lamp's other special 
characteristics, the presence of a heat shield allows the lamp to 
provide a specialty application.
c. Specially Engineered Filament
    NEMA stated that the R20 short lamp's filament was specially 
engineered to provide a required beam spread. 75 FR at 80732 (Dec. 23, 
2010). DOE attempted to identify how the filament was specially 
engineered and if the design change was necessary for the lamp's use in 
pools and spas.
    Through teardowns and interviews with lamp manufacturers, DOE 
verified that R20 short lamps use a C-9 filament. This filament type is 
a single-coil filament that is commonly used in indoor IRLs. DOE 
received feedback from lamp manufacturers that although the filament 
type is not unique, the filament has been specifically placed within 
the lamp in order to achieve the same beam spread as a standard R20 
lamp. Therefore, it is the placement of the filament, rather than the 
filament itself, that is distinct. Because the filament is placed to 
produce a specific beam spread, DOE does not consider filament 
placement to be a special characteristic, but a method of achieving a 
specific beam spread. The beam spread characteristic is discussed 
further in the following section.
d. Lamp Performance: Lumen Output, Beam Spread, and Illumination
    In its petition NEMA stated that R20 short lamps are required to 
meet a specific beam spread and lumen output identified by pool and spa 
part manufacturers. 75 FR at 80733 (Dec. 23, 2010). In interviews with 
lamp manufacturers DOE learned that R20 short lamps have a lumen output 
between 900 and 1,000 lumens and a beam angle between 70 and 80 
degrees. Additionally, DOE received comments that public pools and spas 
are often required to achieve minimum illumination levels. (NEMA, No. 2 
at p. 1) DOE conducted independent testing on each of the two known 
lamp manufacturer's R20 short lamp models to confirm the lumen output 
and beam angle specifications, and also further researched illumination 
requirements.
    The measured lumen output of the two R20 short lamp models 
indicated a lumen output range of 637 lumens to 1,022 lumens. The 
average lumen output of the first model was 967 lumens and within lamp 
manufacturer specified range. The second model's average lumen output 
was 720 lumens, which was considerably lower. DOE did not find any 
information indicating that these lower lumen output R20 short lamp 
models produced an inadequate lumen output or had any issues in their 
use in pool and spa applications. DOE considered both the measured and 
the rated lumen output to determine a broad lumen output range. DOE 
therefore concluded that a potential substitute lamp would need to 
achieve a measured lumen output between 637 and 1,022 lumens.
    The measured beam angle of the R20 short lamp models indicated a 
range of 111 to 123 degrees and was relatively consistent between the 
two models. The average beam angle of the first model was 117 degrees 
and the average beam angle of the second was 116 degrees. The measured 
beam angle range did not correspond to the 70- to 80-degree beam angle 
range identified by lamp manufacturers. However, because lamp 
manufacturer feedback indicated R20 short lamps can have a 70-degree 
beam angle, DOE decided to establish a range encompassing both measured 
and manufacturer-provided beam angles. DOE therefore concluded that a 
potential substitute lamp would need to achieve a measured beam angle 
between 70 and 123 degrees.
    Additionally, as previously stated, DOE further researched 
illumination requirements based on wattage. Pool and spa part 
manufacturers confirmed during interviews that R20 short lamps are 
designed to provide 0.5W of input power per square foot of water 
surface area, or equivalent level of illumination, to account for 
commercial building code requirements pertaining to products for pool 
and spa lighting. In researching building codes, DOE found that while 
commercial building codes exist on both state and local levels, and 
vary by jurisdiction, there is no evidence of pools and spas in the 
residential sector being subject to building code requirements for 
lighting.
    CA Utilities commented that minimum power density requirements 
prescribed in some local safety ordinances are often waived when 
replacement light sources are proven to provide adequate illumination 
comparable to incandescent lighting. For example, CA Utilities stated 
that California State regulations only specify that underwater lighting 
be adequate to see a person at the bottom of the pool and assure water 
quality. Therefore, CA Utilities concluded that low-wattage replacement 
lamps can be used as substitutes provided they have been demonstrated 
to provide acceptable levels of light. (CA Utilities, No. 9 at pp. 2-3)
    DOE agrees with CA Utilities that building code requirements vary 
by jurisdiction and some waive requirements when replacement light 
sources are proven to provide adequate lighting. However, it appears 
that not all jurisdictions have explicitly included this caveat in 
their building codes and some seem to maintain minimum requirements 
based on input power alone. DOE requests further comment on whether 
reduced wattage lamps can be used in all jurisdictions, provided that 
adequate illumination is proven.
    In order to account for the variation in commercial building code 
requirements, DOE used the design specification of 0.5W per square foot 
of water surface area, or the equivalent illumination for reduced 
wattage lamps, to determine if potential substitutes were in 
compliance. DOE requests comment on whether this specification for 
underwater illumination is accurate for commercial building code 
compliance.
2. Reasonable Substitutes With R20 Short Lamp Special Characteristics
    Given the criteria discussed in the previous section, DOE evaluated 
lamps that could serve as potential substitutes by determining whether 
they contained all of the following special characteristics of R20 
short lamps:
     Shortened MOL: An MOL of 3 and \5/8\ inches or less;
     Heat Shield: A shield reflecting radiant energy from lamp 
base;
     Beam Spread: A beam angle between 70 and 123 degrees;
     Lumen Output: A lumen output between 637 and 1,022 lumens; 
and
     Illumination: 0.5W per square foot of water surface area 
or the equivalent.
    With regards to potential substitutes, in its petition NEMA stated 
that Pentair, a pool and spa part manufacturer, had noted only an R20 
short lamp can be used with the existing fixtures because the lamp is 
listed on the fixture's Underwriters Laboratory (UL) listing. (NEMA, 
No. 2 at p. 3) All underwater pool and spa lighting must adhere to the 
applicable UL standards in the United

[[Page 76965]]

States. UL Standard 676 \10\ covers electric luminaires that are 
installed underwater in pools and spas. The UL listing is granted on a 
fixture level; however, the UL listing of underwater lighting fixtures 
mandates certain compatible lamp types. Because the fixtures are tested 
during the UL certification process with specific lamp types, the UL 
listing requires the use of those certified lamp types to remain valid. 
Therefore, if a lamp is used that has not been UL listed for use in a 
specific lighting fixture, manufacturers void the warranty because the 
performance of the fixture and lamp is unknown. Based on interviews 
with pool and spa part manufacturers, DOE does not believe that 
reasonable substitutes will encounter barriers when obtaining a UL 
listing. In fact, one pool and spa part manufacturer has already UL 
listed a smaller diameter IRL for use in the existing fixture. 
Therefore, DOE does not consider a current UL listing to be a necessary 
characteristic when identifying potential substitutes.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ ``Underwater Luminaires and Submersible Junction Boxes'' 
(Approved June 9, 2003, Revised July 6, 2011).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    NEMA commented that underwater lamp fixtures are tightly sealed to 
prevent water intrusion and therefore experience elevated temperatures 
that typically exceed the recommended operating temperature of any 
electronically self-ballasted lamps. NEMA added that current compact 
fluorescent lamp (CFL) and light-emitting diode (LED) PAR lamp \11\ 
designs are also unable to meet the MOL and beam spread requirements 
for pool and spa applications. NEMA therefore concluded that there are 
no available substitutes for pool and spa applications. (NEMA, No. 7 at 
p. 1) However, Earthjustice and NRDC stated that exclusion of R20 short 
lamps is unwarranted because substitute lighting technologies, such as 
LED lamps, exist. (Earthjustice and NRDC, No. 8 at p. 2)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ A lamp that has a parabolic aluminum reflector shape.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    DOE surveyed the market and identified several commercially 
available lamps that were marketed or evaluated by manufacturers as 
potential substitutes for an R20 short lamp. These lamps included more 
efficacious R20 short lamps, smaller diameter IRLs, and LED lamps. When 
analyzing each of the likely replacements, DOE focused on whether they 
possessed the special characteristics of the R20 short lamp. DOE's 
initial findings are outlined below.
a. Improved R20 Short Lamp
    Currently available R20 short lamps do not meet existing energy 
conservation standards. When examining substitute lamps, DOE explored 
the possibility of a halogen-based R20 short lamp with an improved 
efficacy that would meet standards. Specifically, DOE examined the 
addition of halogen capsules to existing R20 short lamps. Tungsten-
halogen lamps are a specific type of IRL that contain a small diameter, 
fused quartz envelope, referred to as a capsule, filled with a halogen 
molecule that surrounds the filament. The use of halogen capsules is 
known to improve the efficacy of IRLs.
    In the RFI, DOE requested additional information on the feasibility 
of improving the efficacy of R20 short lamps while maintaining the 
necessary characteristics required for pool and spa applications. 76 FR 
at 55614 (Sept. 8, 2011). DOE received several comments in response to 
this request, mainly regarding halogen-based technology. NEMA commented 
that incorporating halogen capsules currently used in PAR lamps in R20 
short lamps will not allow R20 short lamps to meet energy conservation 
standards established by the 2009 Lamps Rule that require compliance on 
July 14, 2012. NEMA stated that lamp manufacturers attempted to improve 
the efficacy of R20 short lamps through the use of an incandescent 
halogen capsule, but found it technically infeasible either due to MOL 
constraints, internal dimensional compatibility of the halogen capsule, 
or meeting light output or beam spread requirements. (NEMA, No. 7 at p. 
1)
    CA Utilities and Earthjustice and NRDC disagreed with NEMA's 
comment and stated that the efficacy of existing lamps can be improved 
while still maintaining the necessary requirements for pool and spa 
applications. CA Utilities commented that single-ended and double-ended 
halogen burners are frequently used in small diameter reflector lamps 
to improve efficacy. CA Utilities suggested that because PAR20 lamps, 
which typically do not have MOLs exceeding 3 and \5/8\ inches, can 
accommodate single-ended halogen burners, R20 short lamps could also 
use single-ended halogen burners to improve efficiency. They added that 
these long life halogen PAR20 lamps are now also available in a wide 
variety of beam spreads. CA Utilities also commented that Philips 
offers two small diameter, high efficacy lamps with double-ended 
halogen burners, long lifetime, and wide beam spread. CA Utilities 
concluded that these product offerings indicate that single- and 
double-ended halogen burners are the appropriate size for R20 short 
lamps. (Earthjustice and NRDC, No. 8 at p. 2; CA Utilities, No. 9 at p. 
2)
    In order to determine if an improved R20 short lamp could be a 
substitute, DOE modeled the performance of an R20 short lamp with a 
halogen capsule. DOE then determined if the halogen-based R20 short 
lamp would meet energy conservation standards and the special 
characteristic requirements.
    First, DOE determined the dimensional compatibility of 
incorporating halogen technology in R20 short lamps. DOE performed 
teardowns of a 60W PAR16 lamp containing a single-ended halogen burner, 
a 60W PAR30 lamp containing a double-ended halogen burner, and a 100W 
R20 short lamp to determine the dimensional compatibility of the 
halogen capsules within an R20 short lamp. Based on the dimensions of 
the burners and the R20 short lamp, DOE has tentatively concluded that 
it is possible to fit both the single-ended and double-ended halogen 
burners in an R20 short lamp. DOE notes that single-ended halogen 
burners are already present in commercially available R20 lamps that 
have a listed MOL of 3.54 inches and are intended for use in general 
lighting applications. Given this availability and the results of the 
teardown analysis, DOE agrees with CA Utilities and Earthjustice and 
NRDC that single-ended and double-ended halogen burners are the 
appropriate size for R20 short lamps. For more information on the 
teardowns, see appendix A.
    DOE next performed testing to determine the potential improvement 
in efficacy for R20 short lamps through the use of single-ended and 
double-ended halogen burners. DOE performed independent testing and 
analysis to determine what the theoretical increase in efficacy would 
be, given the successful incorporation of each burner type.
    To determine the efficacy of a theoretical R20 short lamp with a 
single-ended halogen burner, DOE tested a 120V, 45W halogen R20 lamp 
with a MOL of 3.92 inches that contained a single-ended burner. Using 
equations relating lumens and wattage from the Illuminating Engineering 
Society of North America (IESNA) Lighting Handbook (see appendix A), 
DOE scaled the lumen output of the 45W lamp such that it was within the 
desired range. Based on the calculations, DOE expects that when 
designing a more efficient version of an R20 short lamp, lamp 
manufacturers will be able to reduce the

[[Page 76966]]

wattage to at least 75W. DOE determined through this scaling 
calculation that the efficacy of an R20 short lamp improves with the 
use of a single-ended halogen burner. The efficacy of the 100W R20 
short lamp was measured to be 8.5 lumens per watt (lm/W), while the 
theoretical efficacy of the 75W halogen R20 with a single-ended burner 
was calculated to be 10.3 lm/W. However, the efficacy does not increase 
enough to allow the lamp to meet the current energy conservation 
standard of 12.5 lm/W set forth by EISA 2007, or the standard of 16.0 
lm/W prescribed in the 2009 Lamps Rule that requires compliance on July 
14, 2012. Therefore, DOE has tentatively concluded that while a single-
ended burner is dimensionally compatible with an R20 short lamp, this 
improved halogen R20 short lamp is not a suitable replacement as it 
would not meet current standards. For more information on the improved 
efficacy calculation, see appendix A.
    To determine the efficacy of a theoretical R20 short lamp with a 
double-ended burner, DOE tested a 120V, 60W PAR30 short lamp that 
contained a double-ended burner dimensionally compatible with an R20 
short lamp. DOE then applied a reflector efficiency factor (see 
appendix A) to scale the lumen output of the PAR lamp to that of an R 
lamp. Again using IESNA equations relating lumen output and wattage, 
DOE scaled the 60W lamp to a 75W lamp. The efficacy of the 100W R20 
lamp was measured to be 8.5 lm/W, while the efficacy of the 75W halogen 
R20 lamp was calculated to be 13.8 lm/W. DOE determined that the use of 
a double-ended halogen burner would likely enable the 75W R20 halogen 
short lamp to meet the EISA 2007 standard of 12.5 lm/W; however, the 
efficacy would not increase enough to meet the 2009 Lamps Rule standard 
of 16.0 lm/W. Therefore, DOE has tentatively concluded that while a 
double-ended burner is dimensionally compatible with an R20 short lamp, 
this improved halogen R20 short lamp is not a viable substitute because 
the lamp would not meet July 2012 standards. For more information on 
the improved efficacy calculation, see appendix A.
    DOE confirmed during interviews that lamp manufacturers had 
attempted to improve the efficacy of R20 short lamps through the use of 
halogen capsules. The information shared by lamp manufacturers supports 
DOE's findings that while some halogen capsules are dimensionally 
compatible with the R20 short lamp envelope, the use of halogen 
capsules does not improve the efficacy enough to meet the July 2012 
standards.
    Although the two model lamps do not comply with upcoming standards, 
DOE evaluated whether they could include the R20 short lamp special 
characteristics as listed in the beginning of section 0. As 
incorporating the halogen capsule does not affect the lamp length, the 
shortened MOL is retained. The heat shield could also be included in 
the improved R20 short lamp. The addition of a halogen capsule would, 
however, affect the lumen output and beam spread. Based on its 
theoretical modeling, DOE determined that the halogen-based R20 short 
lamp with single-ended burner would likely have a lumen output within 
the established range of 637 to 1,022 lumens, and the R20 short lamp 
with double-ended burner would have a slightly higher, but comparable 
lumen output. Additionally, because the position of the filament 
impacts the beam angle, DOE anticipates that the beam angle could be 
affected by the use of a halogen capsule; however, prototypes would 
need to be constructed and tested in order to confirm. Because DOE 
determined that the halogen-based R20 short lamp was not a viable 
option due to insufficient efficacy improvement, DOE did not conduct 
prototype testing to verify the effect on beam angle.
    Further, DOE preliminarily concluded that the halogen-based R20 
short lamp would meet the 0.5 watts per square foot of water surface 
area or equivalent illumination requirements because the theoretical 
lamp would deliver a higher lumen output with a reduced input wattage 
compared to the R20 short lamp. However, additional testing would be 
required to confirm this conclusion. DOE notes an improved R20 short 
lamp would need to be separately listed on the UL certification for a 
fixture because the lamp would have different specifications than 
current R20 short lamps.
    DOE has tentatively concluded that because the improved efficacy of 
a halogen-based R20 short lamp would not meet or exceed the July 2012 
standards, it is not a reasonable substitute.
b. 60W PAR16 Substitute
    Through market research and manufacturer interviews, DOE determined 
that 60W PAR16 lamps are currently being distributed and sold for use 
in pool and spa applications as a replacement for R20 short lamps. 
Existing energy conservation standards cover PAR lamps that have 
diameters exceeding 2.25 inches. Therefore, PAR16 lamps, which have a 
diameter of 2 inches, are not covered under standards. Through research 
DOE identified two 60W PAR16 models marketed for use in pool and spa 
applications. DOE tested these two models to determine if this lamp 
type contained the R20 short lamp special characteristics identified 
and could serve as a reasonable substitute. In manufacturer interviews, 
DOE was able to identify an additional 60W PAR16 model that can be used 
in pool and spa applications. This model was not tested as DOE 
determined it had adequate information to make a conclusion regarding 
the substitutability of this lamp type.
    The 60W PAR16 lamp is a small diameter halogen lamp with a 
parabolic aluminized reflector. DOE found some variation in MOL of the 
60W PAR16 lamps, ranging from a minimum MOL of 2.86 inches to a maximum 
of 3.31 inches. However, all models had a MOL less than the R20 short 
lamp MOL of 3.625 inches. In addition, the 60W PAR16 lamps tested 
contained heat shields.
    After DOE confirmed that the physical specifications of the 60W 
PAR16 were equivalent to those of the R20 short lamp, DOE considered 
the performance specifications. DOE received feedback from lamp 
manufacturers that the lumen output of 60W PAR16 lamps was between 600 
and 700 lumens and the beam angle was 30 degrees. DOE conducted 
independent testing and determined that the average lumen output of the 
models tested was 733 lumens.\12\ DOE concluded that the lumen output 
of the 60W PAR16 lamp was comparable to that of the R20 short lamp 
because the measured lumen output was within the lumen output range of 
the R20 short lamps (637 to 1,022 lumens).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ The maximum lumen output of the lamps tested was 780 lumens 
and the minimum was 685 lumens.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    DOE also measured beam angles and determined that the average beam 
angle was 34 degrees.\13\ DOE concluded that the beam angle of the 60W 
PAR16 lamp did not meet the beam angle range of the R20 short lamps (70 
to 123 degrees).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ The maximum beam angle was 40 degrees and the minimum beam 
angle was 28 degrees.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Additionally, DOE interviewed lamp manufacturers to determine if 
they considered the 60W PAR16 as a suitable replacement for the R20 
short lamp. Lamp manufacturers commented that while the 60W PAR16 is 
being used in pools and spas, the lamp was not designed for such 
applications. The lamp was not utilized in pools and spas until 
September 2010, when an alternate lamp was needed until the R20 short 
lamp exclusion rulemaking was

[[Page 76967]]

completed. DOE received varying comments on the satisfaction of 60W 
PAR16 lamps in pool and spa applications. While the rated lifetime of 
these lamps is in the same range as the rated lifetime of R20 short 
lamps (2,000 to 2,500 hours), some lamp manufacturers have received 
consumer feedback that the lifetime of the 60W PAR16 lamp is shortened 
when used in pool and spa applications. However, DOE also received 
feedback from pool and spa part manufacturers that the performance of 
the 60W PAR16 has proven to be more robust than the R20 short lamp, and 
that they have seen no issues with shortened lifetime. DOE welcomes 
further clarification on this issue, including test data regarding the 
impact on lifetime of the 60W PAR16 lamps when used in pool and spa 
applications.
    During interviews, some lamp manufacturers commented that the lumen 
output and beam angle of the 60W PAR16 were not sufficient for use in 
pool and spa applications. However, DOE also received comments that the 
performance of the 60W PAR16 was comparable to the R20 short lamp when 
installed in a fixture with optimized components. Pool and spa part 
manufacturers develop underwater lighting based on the performance of a 
lamp and fixture together and optimize the fixture's components in 
order to achieve suitable illumination. A manufacturer of pool and spa 
parts commented that by adding an optimized lens to the R20 short lamp 
fixture, the measured light output and beam angle of the 60W PAR16 lamp 
within the fixture was comparable to the R20 short lamp within the 
fixture with a standard lens. The lens added to the R20 short lamp 
fixture was an existing component, developed for use with underwater 
LED lighting in order to provide a more diffuse beam spread. The pool 
and spa part manufacturer provided test results of the 60W PAR16 within 
the R20 short lamp fixture both with and without the optimized LED 
lens. When the LED lens was used, the beam angle was substantially 
increased and fell within the required beam angle range. However, 
because the subject of this rulemaking is specific to the lamp, DOE 
must evaluate the performance of the lamp alone when determining the 
availability of reasonable substitutes.
    The 60W PAR16 is currently being marketed and sold for use in pool 
and spa applications and therefore likely to be compliant with building 
code requirements for appropriate illumination of pool/spas. DOE also 
notes that the 60W PAR16 lamp is UL listed for use in R20 short lamp 
fixtures.
    The 60W PAR16 lamp is physically compatible with an underwater 
light fixture due to its short MOL and also contains a heat shield. 
However, in order for the 60W PAR16 to serve as a replacement for the 
R20 short lamp, modifications must be made to achieve the acceptable 
beam spread. Specifically, the 60W PAR16 must be partnered with a 
fixture with an optimized LED lens to achieve the appropriate beam 
angle. Because the 60W PAR16 lamp alone does not contain all of the 
special characteristics of a R20 short lamp, DOE has tentatively 
concluded that this is not a reasonable substitute.
c. LED Replacement Lamp
    CA Utilities commented that several commercially available LED 
lamps could serve as replacements for R20 short lamps. CA Utilities 
added that while the products are currently more expensive, they offer 
longer lifetimes with lower maintenance costs. In addition, LED prices 
are expected to decrease as the technology matures. (CA Utilities, No. 
9 at p. 2) DOE did confirm that LED replacement lamps are currently 
being sold for use in pool and spa fixtures. DOE researched three LED 
models that were determined to be compatible with the R20 short lamp 
fixture in order to determine if the lamps offered the special 
characteristics of the R20 short lamp and could therefore be considered 
a substitutable lamp type.
    One of the LED models that can be used as a replacement for R20 
short lamps has a rated wattage of 8 W, a diameter of 2.5 inches, and 
has a listed MOL of 3.5 inches, which is less than that of a R20 short 
lamp MOL of 3.625 inches. The lamp has a lumen output of 500 lumens and 
a 40 degree beam angle. Additionally, the lamp has a rated lifetime of 
40,000 hours. While the use of a heat shield is not applicable to LED 
lamps, the lamp manufacturer indicated that the lamp was adapted for 
use in underwater pool and spa applications and certain components were 
changed in order to withstand the high heat environment.
    This LED lamp has the required MOL for pool and spa applications, 
however, the lamp does not achieve the required lumen output and beam 
angle. The LED lamp's rated lumen output of 500 lumens is notably less 
than the established acceptable range of 637 and 1,022 lumens. 
Additionally, the LED lamp's beam angle of 40 degrees is also 
considerably less than specified beam angle range of 70 to 123 degrees. 
DOE has tentatively concluded based on the lamp manufacturer-provided 
specifications, that this LED model is not a reasonable substitute 
because the lamp does not have the required special characteristics of 
the R20 short lamp.
    The remaining two LED models for use in the R20 short lamp fixture 
did not have published performance specifications. DOE contacted the 
lamp manufacturers, but was able to obtain only limited information on 
the models. DOE was able to determine that one model has a rated 
wattage of 20 W, an MOL of 3.3 inches, and a diameter of 3.0 inches. 
DOE was unable to find information on the lamp shape, lumen output, 
beam angle, and rated lifetime of the model. For the other model, DOE 
was able to determine that it has a rated wattage of 12 W, an MOL of 
2.41 inches, and a diameter of 3.07 inches. Similarly, DOE was unable 
to find information on the lamp shape, lumen output, beam angle, and 
rated lifetime of the model. Because of the limited information on 
these two LED models, DOE cannot conclude that the lamps have the 
required special characteristics of R20 short lamps. DOE welcomes 
further information on potential LED replacement models.
    DOE assumed that because the LED lamps are currently being marketed 
and sold for use in pool and spa applications, these lamps provide the 
equivalent illumination of 0.5 watts per square foot of water surface 
area. DOE notes that the LED lamps are not UL listed for use in R20 
short lamp fixtures.
    DOE also identified an LED lamp that is being sold for use in pool 
and spa applications, but cannot be installed in an R20 short lamp 
fixture and, therefore, requires a compatible LED fixture. The LED lamp 
and fixture are intended to be a direct replacement for the R20 short 
lamp and fixture. Because the replacement option requires a completely 
new fixture and this rulemaking is evaluating the lamp alone, DOE has 
determined that this LED lamp is not a reasonable substitute.
    Based on the foregoing, DOE has tentatively concluded that 
commercially available LED lamps are not reasonable substitutes because 
they do not have the required special characteristics of R20 short 
lamps. DOE also tentatively concluded that the LED lamp and fixture 
replacement identified is not a reasonable substitute because it 
requires more than the lamp to be replaced.
    DOE requests comment on the analysis of potential R20 short lamp 
substitutes and its initial conclusion that there are no reasonable 
substitutes for this lamp type.

[[Page 76968]]

D. Conclusion

    In interviews with manufacturers, DOE established that R20 short 
lamps were designed for pool and spa applications based on industry 
need and consumer preference. The design requirements included a wide 
beam spread, high lumen output and adequate illumination; a heat shield 
to withstand the high operating temperatures of spas; and a shortened 
MOL, allowing the lamp to fit in underwater pool or spa fixtures. 
Further, DOE determined that the majority of R20 short lamps are 
purchased from pool and spa distributors and specialty retail stores, 
and are not available where IRLs are typically sold for general 
lighting applications. R20 short lamps are also marketed and clearly 
packaged in a way that indicates the lamps are specifically for pools 
and spas. Therefore, DOE has preliminarily concluded that R20 short 
lamps are designed for pool and spa applications. Due to the special 
application of R20 short lamps, DOE assessed the impact on energy 
savings from the exclusion of these lamps from energy conservation 
standards. As R20 short lamps have a small market share and limited 
potential for growth, DOE tentatively determined that the regulation of 
R20 short lamps would not result in significant energy savings.
    DOE also evaluated lamps that could serve as potential substitutes 
by analyzing their ability to replicate the specialized characteristics 
of the R20 short lamp, specifically a shortened MOL, heat shield, high 
lumen output, wide beam spread, and adequate illumination. DOE 
considered a halogen-based R20 short lamp with improved efficacy, a 
commercially available 60W PAR16 lamp, and LED lamps as potential 
substitutes. DOE has tentatively disqualified these lamps as reasonable 
substitutes for the following reasons: (1) The halogen-based R20 short 
lamp would not comply with standards; (2) the 60W PAR16 can only 
achieve the required beam spread when partnered with a fixture with an 
optimized LED lens; and (3) the LED replacement does not have the 
necessary lumen output.\14\ Therefore, DOE has tentatively concluded 
that there are no reasonably substitutable lamp types currently 
available that offer the special characteristics of R20 short lamps.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ Performance information was not available for all LED 
replacements.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Based on the previous assessments, DOE proposes to exclude R20 
short lamps from energy conservation standards. DOE's analysis has 
initially found that energy conservation standards for R20 short lamps 
would not result in significant energy savings because the lamps are 
designed for special applications, and also that the lamps have special 
characteristics that are not available in reasonably substitutable lamp 
types. Therefore, under section 6291(30)(E), DOE proposes to exclude 
R20 short lamps from energy conservation standards by modifying the 
definition of ``Incandescent reflector lamp'' and proposing a new 
definition for ``R20 Short Lamp'' in 10 CFR 430.2. DOE requests comment 
on its proposed determination that R20 short lamps should be excluded 
from energy conservation standards.

E. Options for Conditional Exclusions

    Stakeholders provided additional suggestions on how to exclude R20 
short lamps from energy conservation standards. Earthjustice and NRDC 
commented that if DOE excludes R20 short lamps from coverage under EPCA 
energy conservation standards, measures must be taken to ensure that 
the blanket exclusion does not become a loophole. Earthjustice and NRDC 
provided four recommendations for conditional exclusions. In one 
recommendation, Earthjustice and NRDC suggested that DOE could provide 
exclusion only for R20 short lamps installed in states where 120V 
electricity supplies pools and spas. This would prevent R20 short lamps 
from migrating to states where the only use would be as a substitute 
for an IRL that meets standards. Earthjustice and NRDC suggested in 
another recommendation that DOE limit the exclusion to a specified 
number of R20 short lamps. They stated DOE has the authority to do this 
because section 6291(30)(E) authorizes DOE to grant exclusion from 
standards at the individual lamp level. Another recommendation was to 
exclude the first 100,000 R20 short lamps produced after the final rule 
effective date on the basis that subsequent production would abate 
findings that standards would not result in significant energy savings. 
In addition, Earthjustice and NRDC suggested DOE could establish an 
annual sales limit, restricting the market share and thereby ensuring 
that standards for R20 short lamps would not result in significant 
energy savings. They stated that this could be accomplished by 
requiring manufacturers to report sales quarterly and terminating the 
exclusion when reported sales exceed an established percentage of 
historic annual sales. (Earthjustice and NRDC, No. 8 at pp. 2-4)
    Finally, Earthjustice and NRDC also suggested that any exclusion 
expire after five years, regardless of lamp sales. This would allow R20 
short lamp manufacturers enough time to perform necessary redesign for 
incorporating more energy-efficient lighting technologies at the lowest 
possible cost, while not greatly reducing energy savings achieved 
through standards. Ibid.
    As mentioned previously, DOE does not anticipate market growth or 
market migration of R20 short lamps due to their application-specific 
marketing and unique distribution channels. DOE's proposed definition 
for R20 short lamps requires them to be designed, labeled, and marketed 
for pool and spa applications. However, DOE would consider reevaluating 
the exclusion of R20 short lamps from energy conservation standards, if 
it was found that lamp sales were increasing due to market migration 
after an exclusion of R20 short lamps was granted. DOE invites the 
submission of shipment information that supports increased lamp sales 
following an exclusion of R20 short lamps.
    Earthjustice and NRDC also suggested that DOE require a technical 
specification for R20 short lamps, such as a specific correlated color 
temperature value, that would not significantly affect quality or 
efficiency but would ensure the lamp would not be used in other 
applications. (Earthjustice and NRDC, No. 8 at p. 4) EPCA authorizes 
DOE to consider and adopt only performance-based energy conservation 
standards for this product. (42 U.S.C. 6291(6)) DOE cannot, therefore, 
specify R20 short lamps to have certain technical characteristics. 
Further, as stated previously, DOE does not anticipate that R20 short 
lamps would be used in other applications and therefore, does not see a 
need for such a requirement.

IV. Procedural Issues and Regulatory Review

A. Review Under Executive Orders 12866 and 13563

    Today's regulatory action has been determined to not be a 
``significant regulatory action'' under section 3(f) of Executive Order 
12866, ``Regulatory Planning and Review,'' 58 FR 51735 (Oct. 4, 1993). 
Accordingly, the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA) in 
the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) is not required to review 
this action.
    DOE has also reviewed this proposed regulation pursuant to 
Executive Order 13563, issued on January 18, 2011 (76

[[Page 76969]]

FR 3281 (Jan. 21, 2011)). Executive Order 13563 is supplemental to and 
explicitly reaffirms the principles, structures, and definitions 
governing regulatory review established in Executive Order 12866. To 
the extent permitted by law, agencies are required by Executive Order 
13563 to: (1) Propose or adopt a regulation only upon a reasoned 
determination that its benefits justify its costs (recognizing that 
some benefits and costs are difficult to quantify); (2) tailor 
regulations to impose the least burden on society, consistent with 
obtaining regulatory objectives, taking into account, among other 
things, and to the extent practicable, the costs of cumulative 
regulations; (3) select, in choosing among alternative regulatory 
approaches, those approaches that maximize net benefits (including 
potential economic, environmental, public health and safety, and other 
advantages; distributive impacts; and equity); (4) to the extent 
feasible, specify performance objectives, rather than specifying the 
behavior or manner of compliance that regulated entities must adopt; 
and (5) identify and assess available alternatives to direct 
regulation, including providing economic incentives to encourage the 
desired behavior, such as user fees or marketable permits, or providing 
information upon which choices can be made by the public.
    DOE emphasizes as well that Executive Order 13563 requires agencies 
to use the best available techniques to quantify anticipated present 
and future benefits and costs as accurately as possible. In its 
guidance, OIRA has emphasized that such techniques may include 
identifying changing future compliance costs that might result from 
technological innovation or anticipated behavioral changes. For the 
reasons stated in the preamble, DOE believes that today's NOPR is 
consistent with these principles, including the requirement that, to 
the extent permitted by law, benefits justify costs and that net 
benefits are maximized.

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 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 today's proposed rulemaking under the provisions of 
the Regulatory Flexibility Act and the policies and procedures 
published on February 19, 2003. This proposed rulemaking would set no 
standards; it would only determine whether exclusion from standards is 
warranted for R20 short lamps. DOE certifies that this proposed 
rulemaking will not have a significant impact on a substantial number 
of small entities. The factual basis for this certification is as 
follows.
    For manufacturers of 100W R20 IRLs with an MOL of 3 and \5/8\ 
inches, the Small Business Administration (SBA) has set a size 
threshold, which defines those entities classified as ``small 
businesses'' for the purposes of the statute. DOE used the SBA's small 
business size standards to determine whether any small entities 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 121. The size standards are listed by North American Industry 
Classification System (NAICS) code and industry description and are 
available at http://www.sba.gov/sites/default/files/files/Size_Standards_Table.pdf. The manufacturing of R20 short lamps 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. 
DOE identified two small business manufacturers of R20 short lamps.
    Amendments to EPCA in the Energy Policy Act of 1992 (EPAct 1992), 
Public Law 102-486, established the current energy conservation 
standards for certain classes of IRLs. On July 14, 2009, DOE published 
a final rule in the Federal Register that amended these standards, with 
a compliance date of July 14, 2012. 74 FR 34080. In that rulemaking, 
DOE concluded that the standards would not have a substantial impact on 
small entities and, therefore, did not prepare a regulatory flexibility 
analysis. 74 FR at 34174-75 (July 14, 2009). On the basis of the 
foregoing and because this rulemaking to establish an exclusion would 
decrease regulatory burden, DOE certifies that this rulemaking will 
have no significant economic impact on a substantial number of small 
entities. Accordingly, DOE has not prepared an IRFA for this NOPR. DOE 
will transmit this certification and supporting statement of factual 
basis to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the SBA for review under 5 
U.S.C. 605(b).

C. Review Under the Paperwork Reduction Act

    This rulemaking, which proposes an exclusion from energy 
conservation standards for R20 short lamps, would impose no new 
information or record keeping requirements. Accordingly, the OMB 
clearance is not required under the Paperwork Reduction Act. (44 U.S.C. 
3501 et seq.)

D. Review Under the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969

    Pursuant to the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) of 1969, 
DOE has determined that this proposed rulemaking fits within the 
category of actions that are categorically excluded from review under 
the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (Pub. L. 91-190, codified 
at 42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.), and DOE's implementing regulations at 10 
CFR part 1021. Specifically, the proposed rulemaking amends an existing 
rule without changing its environmental effect, and, therefore, is 
covered by Categorical Exclusion (CX) A5 found in 10 CFR part 1021, 
subpart D, appendix A. Therefore, as DOE has made a CX determination 
for the proposed rulemaking, DOE does not need to prepare an 
Environmental Assessment or Environmental Impact Statement. DOE's CX 
determination is available at http://cxnepa.energy.gov/.

E. Review Under Executive Order 13132

    Executive Order 13132, ``Federalism,'' 64 FR 43255 (Aug. 10, 1999) 
imposes certain requirements on federal agencies formulating and 
implementing policies or regulations that preempt state laws 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

[[Page 76970]]

development of such regulations. 65 FR 13735. EPCA governs and 
prescribes federal preemption of state regulations as to energy 
conservation for the covered product that is the subject of today's 
proposed rulemaking. 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) No further action is required by Executive Order 13132.

F. Review Under Executive Order 12988

    With respect to the review of existing regulations and the 
promulgation of new regulations, section 3(a) of Executive Order 12988, 
``Civil Justice Reform,'' 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; and (3) 
provide a clear legal standard for affected conduct rather than a 
general standard and promote simplification and burden reduction. 61 FR 
4729 (Feb. 7, 1996). 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 section 3(a) and 
section 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, this proposed 
rulemaking 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. DOE's policy 
statement is also available at http://energy.gov/gc/office-general-counsel.
    DOE examined today's proposed rulemaking 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. Instead, if adopted in 
a final rulemaking, the rule would exclude R20 IRLs with an MOL of 3 
and \5/8\ inches from standards, thereby eliminating any existing 
compliance costs. Accordingly, no further assessment or analysis is 
required under the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995.

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 proposed rulemaking 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 (Mar. 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 the 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 federal 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 today's proposed rulemaking 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 OIRA 
at 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 promulgates 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.
    DOE has tentatively concluded that today's proposed regulatory 
action, which excludes R20 short lamps from coverage under energy 
conservation standards, is not a significant energy action because the 
proposed exclusion from standards is not a significant regulatory 
action under Executive Order 12866, is not likely to have a significant 
adverse effect on the supply, distribution, or use of energy, nor has 
it been designated as such by the Administrator at OIRA. Accordingly, 
DOE has not prepared a Statement of Energy Effects on the proposed 
rulemaking.

[[Page 76971]]

L. Review Under the Information Quality Bulletin for Peer Review

    On December 16, 2004, OMB, in consultation with the Office of 
Science and Technology Policy (OSTP), issued its Final Information 
Quality Bulletin for Peer Review (the Bulletin). 70 FR 2664 (Jan. 14, 
2005). The Bulletin establishes that certain scientific information 
shall be peer reviewed by qualified specialists before it is 
disseminated by the Federal Government, including influential 
scientific information related to agency regulatory actions. The 
purpose of the Bulletin is to enhance the quality and credibility of 
the Government's scientific information. Under the Bulletin, the energy 
conservation standards rulemaking analyses are ``influential scientific 
information,'' which the Bulletin defines as scientific information the 
agency reasonably can determine will have, or does have, a clear and 
substantial impact on important public policies or private sector 
decisions. 70 FR at 2667 (Jan. 14, 2005).
    In response to OMB's Bulletin, DOE conducted formal in-progress 
peer reviews of the energy conservation standards development process 
and analyses and has prepared a Peer Review Report pertaining to the 
energy conservation standards rulemaking analyses. Generation of this 
report involved a rigorous, formal, and documented evaluation using 
objective criteria and qualified and independent reviewers to make a 
judgment as to the technical/scientific/business merit, the actual or 
anticipated results, and the productivity and management effectiveness 
of programs and/or projects. The ``Energy Conservation Standards 
Rulemaking Peer Review Report'' dated February 2007 has been 
disseminated and is available at the following Web site: 
www1.eere.energy.gov/buildings/appliance_standards/peer_review.html.

V. Public Participation

A. Submission of Comments

    DOE will accept comments, data, and information regarding this NOPR 
no later than the date provided in the DATES section at the beginning 
of this notice. Interested parties may submit comments, data, and other 
information 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 itself 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. Otherwise, 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 
below.
    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/courier, 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 in 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/courier, 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 not secured, that are written in English, and that are free of any 
defects or viruses. 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/courier 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,

[[Page 76972]]

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's assessment of the identified special characteristics of 
R20 short lamps and any other features that should be considered 
special characteristics;
    2. The proposal that R20 short lamps qualify for an exclusion from 
energy conservation standards because of insignificant energy savings 
attributable to their design for specialty applications;
    3. Whether reduced wattage lamps can be used as reasonable 
substitutes in pool and spa applications in all jurisdictions provided 
that they meet the 0.5W of input power per square foot of water surface 
area, or equivalent level of illumination;
    4. The identified specifications for underwater illumination (0.5W 
of input power per square foot of water surface area, or equivalent 
level of illumination) for building code compliance and whether this 
requirement is appropriate when qualifying a lamp as a reasonable 
substitute; and
    5. DOE's analysis of potential R20 short lamp substitutes and the 
conclusion that there are no reasonably substitutable lamps for this 
lamp type.

VI. Approval of the Office of the Secretary

    The Secretary of Energy has approved publication of today's 
proposed rulemaking.

List of Subjects in 10 CFR Part 430

    Administrative practice and procedure, Confidential Business 
Information, Energy conservation, Household appliances, Imports, 
Intergovernmental relations, Small businesses.

    Issued in Washington, DC, on December 21, 2012.
David T. Danielson,
Assistant Secretary, Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy.
    For the reasons set forth in the preamble, DOE proposes to amend 
part 430 of chapter II, subchapter D, of title 10 of the Code of 
Federal Regulations, as set forth below:

PART 430--ENERGY CONSERVATION PROGRAM FOR CONSUMER PRODUCTS

    1. The authority citation for part 430 continues to read as 
follows:

    Authority: 42 U.S.C. 6291-6309; 28 U.S.C. 2461 note.

    2. In Sec.  430.2, revise the definition for ``Incandescent 
reflector lamp'' and add the definition for ``R20 short lamp,'' in 
alphabetical order, to read as follows:


Sec.  430.2  Definitions.

* * * * *
    Incandescent reflector lamp (commonly referred to as a reflector 
lamp) means any lamp in which light is produced by a filament heated to 
incandescence by an electric current, which: Contains an inner 
reflective coating on the outer bulb to direct the light; is not 
colored; is not designed for rough or vibration service applications; 
is not an R20 short lamp; has an R, PAR, ER, BR, BPAR, or similar bulb 
shapes with an E26 medium screw base; has a rated voltage or voltage 
range that lies at least partially in the range of 115 and 130 volts; 
has a diameter that exceeds 2.25 inches; and has a rated wattage that 
is 40 watts or higher.
* * * * *
    R20 short lamp means a lamp that is an R20 incandescent reflector 
lamp that has a rated wattage of 100 watts; has a maximum overall 
length of 3 and \5/8\, or 3.625, inches; and is designed, labeled, and 
marketed specifically for pool and spa applications.
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2012-31396 Filed 12-28-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6450-01-P