[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 85 (Friday, May 1, 2020)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 25326-25340]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2020-08851]
========================================================================
Proposed Rules
Federal Register
________________________________________________________________________
This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER contains notices to the public of
the proposed issuance of rules and regulations. The purpose of these
notices is to give interested persons an opportunity to participate in
the rule making prior to the adoption of the final rules.
========================================================================
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 85 / Friday, May 1, 2020 / Proposed
Rules
[[Page 25326]]
DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
10 CFR Part 430
[EERE-2019-BT-STD-0030]
Energy Conservation Program: Energy Conservation Standards for
General Service Fluorescent Lamps and Incandescent Reflector Lamps
AGENCY: Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, Department of
Energy.
ACTION: Request for information.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The U.S. Department of Energy (``DOE'') is initiating an
effort to determine whether to amend the current energy conservation
standards for general service fluorescent lamps (``GSFLs'') and
incandescent reflector lamps (``IRLs''). Under the Energy Policy and
Conservation Act, as amended, DOE must review these standards at least
once every six years and publish either a notice of proposed rulemaking
(``NOPR'') to propose new standards for GSFLs and/or IRLs or a notice
of determination that the existing standards do not need to be amended.
This request for information (``RFI'') solicits information from the
public to help DOE determine whether amended standards for GSFLs and
IRLs would result in significant energy savings and whether such
standards would be technologically feasible and economically justified.
DOE welcomes written comments from the public on any subject within the
scope of this document (including those topics not specifically
raised), as well as the submission of data and other relevant
information.
DATES: Written comments and information will be accepted on or before
June 1, 2020.
ADDRESSES: Interested persons are encouraged to submit comments using
the Federal eRulemaking Portal at http://www.regulations.gov. Follow
the instructions for submitting comments. Alternatively, interested
persons may submit comments, identified by docket number EERE-2019-BT-
STD-0030, by any of the following methods:
1. Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov. Follow
the instructions for submitting comments.
2. Email: [email protected]. Include the docket number
EERE-2019-BT-STD-0030 in the subject line of the message.
3. Postal Mail: Appliance and Equipment Standards Program, U.S.
Department of Energy, Building Technologies Office, Mailstop EE-5B,
1000 Independence Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20585-0121. Telephone:
(202) 287-1445. If possible, please submit all items on a compact disc
(``CD''), in which case it is not necessary to include printed copies.
4. Hand Delivery/Courier: Appliance and Equipment Standards
Program, U.S. Department of Energy, Building Technologies Office, 950
L'Enfant Plaza SW, 6th Floor, Washington, DC 20024. Telephone: (202)
287-1445. If possible, please submit all items on a CD, in which case
it is not necessary to include printed copies.
No telefacsimilies (faxes) will be accepted. For detailed
instructions on submitting comments and additional information on this
process, see section IV of this document.
Docket: The docket for this activity, which includes Federal
Register notices, comments, and other supporting documents/materials,
is available for review at http://www.regulations.gov. All documents in
the docket are listed in the http://www.regulations.gov index. However,
some documents listed in the index, such as those containing
information that is exempt from public disclosure, may not be publicly
available.
The docket web page can be found at http://www.regulations.gov/#!docketDetail;D=EERE-2019-BT-STD-0030. The docket web page contains
instructions on how to access all documents, including public comments,
in the docket. See section IV for information on how to submit comments
through http://www.regulations.gov.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. Lucy deButts, U.S. Department of
Energy, Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, Building
Technologies Office, EE-5B, 1000 Independence Avenue SW, Washington, DC
20585-0121. Telephone: (202) 287-1604. Email:
[email protected].
Ms. Kathryn McIntosh, U.S. Department of Energy, Office of the
General Counsel, GC-33, 1000 Independence Avenue SW, Washington, DC
20585-0121. Telephone: (202) 586-2002. Email:
[email protected].
For further information on how to submit a comment, or review other
public comments and the docket contact the Appliance and Equipment
Standards Program staff at (202) 287-1445 or by email:
[email protected].
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Table of Contents
I. Introduction
A. Authority and Background
B. Rulemaking Process
II. Request for Information and Comments
A. Products Covered by This Process
1. Definitions
2. Certain ER, BR, and R IRLs
B. Market and Technology Assessment
1. Product Classes
2. Technology Assessment
C. Screening Analysis
D. Engineering Analysis
1. Representative Product Classes
2. Baseline lamps
3. Efficacy Levels and Maximum Technologically Feasible Levels
4. Scaling to Other Product Classes
E. Product Price Determination
F. Energy Use Analysis
G. Life-Cycle Cost and Payback Analysis
H. Shipments
I. National Impact Analysis
J. Manufacturer Impact Analysis
III. Other Energy Conservation Standards Topics
A. Market Failures
B. Network Mode/``Smart'' Technology
C. Other Issues
IV. Submission of Comments
I. Introduction
A. Authority and Background
The Energy Policy and Conservation Act, as amended (``EPCA''),\1\
authorizes DOE to regulate the energy efficiency of a number of
consumer products and certain industrial equipment. (42 U.S.C. 6291-
6317) Title III, Part B \2\ of EPCA
[[Page 25327]]
established the Energy Conservation Program for Consumer Products Other
Than Automobiles. These products include GSFLs and IRLs, the subject of
this document. (42 U.S.C. 6292(a)(14))
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ All references to EPCA in this document refer to the statute
as amended through America's Water Infrastructure Act of 2018,
Public Law 115-270 (October 23, 2018).
\2\ For editorial reasons, upon codification in the U.S. Code,
Part B was redesignated Part A.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The energy conservation program under EPCA consists essentially of
four parts: (1) Testing, (2) labeling, (3) Federal energy conservation
standards, and (4) certification and enforcement procedures. Relevant
provisions of EPCA specifically include definitions (42 U.S.C. 6291),
test procedures (42 U.S.C. 6293), labeling provisions (42 U.S.C. 6294),
energy conservation standards (42 U.S.C. 6295), and the authority to
require information and reports from manufacturers (42 U.S.C. 6296).
Federal energy efficiency requirements for covered products
established under EPCA generally supersede State laws and regulations
concerning energy conservation testing, labeling, and standards. (42
U.S.C. 6297(a)-(c)). DOE may, however, grant waivers of Federal
preemption for particular State laws or regulations, in accordance with
the procedures and other provisions set forth under EPCA. See 42 U.S.C.
6297(d).
Amendments to EPCA in the Energy Policy Act of 1992 (``EPAct
1992''; Pub. L. 102-486), established energy conservation standards for
certain classes of GSFLs and IRLs, and authorized DOE to conduct two
rulemaking cycles to determine whether these standards should be
amended. (42 U.S.C. 6295(i)(1) and (3)-(4)) EPCA also authorized DOE to
adopt standards for additional GSFLs, if such standards were warranted.
(42 U.S.C. 6295(i)(5)). DOE completed the first of these rulemaking
cycles in a final rule published on July 14, 2009, that adopted amended
performance standards for GSFLs and IRLs manufactured on or after July
14, 2012. 74 FR 34080 (``2009 GSFL-IRL ECS final rule''). That rule
adopted standards for additional GSFLs, amended the definition of
``colored fluorescent lamp'' and ``rated wattage,'' and also adopted
test procedures applicable to the newly covered GSFLs. Id. DOE
completed a second rulemaking cycle to amend the standards for GSFLs
and IRLs by publishing a final rule on January 26, 2015. 80 FR 4042
(``2015 GSFL-IRL ECS final rule''). In this rule DOE amended standards
for GSFLs; and concluded that amending standards for IRLs would not be
economically justified. Id. The current energy conservation standards
for GSFLs and IRLs are located in Title 10 of the Code of Federal
Regulations (``CFR'') section 430.32. The currently applicable DOE test
procedures appear at 10 CFR part 430, subpart B, appendix R.
EPCA also requires that, not later than 6 years after the issuance
of any final rule establishing or amending a standard, DOE evaluate the
energy conservation standards for each type of covered product,
including those at issue here, and publish either a notice of
determination that the standards do not need to be amended, or a NOPR
that includes new proposed energy conservation standards (proceeding to
a final rule, as appropriate). (42 U.S.C. 6295(m)(1)) DOE must make the
analysis on which the determination is based publicly available and
provide an opportunity for written comment. (42 U.S.C. 6295(m)(2)) In
making a determination that the standards do not need to be amended,
DOE must evaluate whether amended standards (1) will result in
significant conservation of energy, (2) are technologically feasible,
and (3) are cost effective as described under 42 U.S.C.
6295(o)(2)(B)(i)(II). (42 U.S.C. 6295(m)(1)(A); 42 U.S.C. 6295(n)(2))
Under 42 U.S.C. 6295(o)(2)(B)(i)(II), DOE must determine whether the
benefits of a standard exceed its burdens by, to the greatest extent
practicable, considering the savings in operating costs throughout the
estimated average life of the covered product in the type (or class)
compared to any increase in the price of, or in the initial charges
for, or maintenance expenses of, the covered products which are likely
to result from the imposition of the standard. If DOE determines not to
amend a standard based on the statutory criteria, not later than 3
years after the issuance of a final determination not to amend
standards, DOE must publish either a notice of determination that
standards for the product do not need to be amended, or a NOPR
including new proposed energy conservation standards (proceeding to a
final rule, as appropriate). (42 U.S.C. 6295(m)(3)(B))
In determining whether to propose new standards, DOE must evaluate
that proposal against the criteria of 42 U.S.C. 6295(o), as described
in the following section, and follow the rulemaking procedures set out
in 42 U.S.C. 6295(p). (42 U.S.C. 6295(m)(1)(B) If DOE decides to amend
the standard based on the statutory criteria, DOE must publish a final
rule not later than two years after energy conservation standards are
proposed. (42 U.S.C. 6295(m)(3)(A))
DOE is publishing this RFI to collect data and information to
inform its decision consistent with its obligations under EPCA.
B. Rulemaking Process
DOE must follow specific statutory criteria for prescribing new or
amended standards for covered products. EPCA requires that any new or
amended energy conservation standard prescribed by the Secretary be
designed to achieve the maximum improvement in energy or water
efficiency that is technologically feasible and economically justified.
(42 U.S.C. 6295(o)(2)(A)) EPCA also precludes DOE from adopting any
standard that would not result in the significant conservation of
energy. (42 U.S.C. 6295(o)(3)(B)) To determine whether a standard is
economically justified, EPCA requires that DOE determine whether the
benefits of the standard exceed its burdens by considering, to the
greatest extent practicable, the following seven factors:
(1) The economic impact of the standard on the manufacturers and
consumers of the affected products;
(2) The savings in operating costs throughout the estimated average
life of the product compared to any increases in the initial cost, or
maintenance expenses;
(3) The total projected amount of energy and water (if applicable)
savings likely to result directly from the standard;
(4) Any lessening of the utility or the performance of the products
likely to result from the standard;
(5) The impact of any lessening of competition, as determined in
writing by the Attorney General, that is likely to result from the
standard;
(6) The need for national energy and water conservation; and
(7) Other factors the Secretary of Energy (Secretary) considers
relevant.
(42 U.S.C. 6295(o)(2)(B)(i)(I)-(VII))
DOE fulfills these and other applicable requirements by conducting
a series of analyses throughout the rulemaking process. Table I.1 shows
the individual analyses that are performed to satisfy each of the
requirements within EPCA.
[[Page 25328]]
Table I.1--EPCA Requirements and Corresponding DOE Analysis
------------------------------------------------------------------------
EPCA requirement Corresponding DOE analysis
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Significant Energy Savings........ Shipments Analysis
National Impact Analysis
Energy and Water Use
Determination
Technological Feasibility......... Market and Technology
Assessment
Screening Analysis
Engineering Analysis
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Economic Justification
------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. Economic impact on Manufacturer Impact
manufacturers and consumers. Analysis
Life-Cycle Cost and Payback
Period Analysis
Life-Cycle Cost Subgroup
Analysis
Shipments Analysis
2. Lifetime operating cost savings Markups for Product Price
compared to increased cost for Determination
the product. Energy and Water Use
Determination
Life-Cycle Cost and Payback
Period Analysis
3. Total projected energy savings. Shipments Analysis
National Impact Analysis
4. Impact on utility or Screening Analysis
performance. Engineering Analysis
5. Impact of any lessening of Manufacturer Impact
competition. Analysis
6. Need for national energy and Shipments Analysis
water conservation. National Impact Analysis
7. Other factors the Secretary Employment Impact Analysis
considers relevant. Utility Impact Analysis
Emissions Analysis
Monetization of Emission
Reductions Benefits
Regulatory Impact Analysis
------------------------------------------------------------------------
As detailed throughout this RFI, DOE is publishing this document
seeking input and data from interested parties to aid in the
development of the technical analyses on which DOE will ultimately rely
to determine whether (and if so, how) to amend the standards for GSFLs
and IRLs.
II. Request for Information and Comments
In the following sections, DOE has identified a variety of issues
on which it seeks input to aid in the development of the technical and
economic analyses regarding whether amended standards for GSFLs and
IRLs may be warranted. DOE also welcomes comments on other issues
relevant to this data-gathering process that may not specifically be
identified in this document.
As an initial matter, DOE seeks comment on whether there have been
sufficient technological or market changes since the most recent
standards update that may justify a new rulemaking to consider more
stringent standards. Specifically, DOE seeks data and information that
could enable the agency to determine whether DOE should propose a ``no
new standard'' determination because a more stringent standard: (1)
Would not result in a significant savings of energy; (2) is not
technologically feasible; (3) is not economically justified; or (4) any
combination of foregoing.
A. Products Covered by This Process
This RFI covers those products that meet the definitions of GSFL
and IRL, as codified at 10 CFR 430.2. DOE conducts separate analyses of
GSFLs and IRLs.
1. Definitions
The definition of ``general service fluorescent lamp'' is based on
the definition of ``fluorescent lamp,'' both of which are specified
below.
Fluorescent lamp means a low pressure mercury electric-discharge
source in which a fluorescing coating transforms some of the
ultraviolet energy generated by the mercury discharge into light,
including only the following:
(1) Any straight-shaped lamp (commonly referred to as 4-foot medium
bipin lamps) with medium bipin bases of nominal overall length of 48
inches and rated wattage of 25 or more;
(2) Any U-shaped lamp (commonly referred to as 2-foot U-shaped
lamps) with medium bipin bases of nominal overall length between 22 and
25 inches and rated wattage of 25 or more;
(3) Any rapid start lamp (commonly referred to as 8-foot high
output lamps) with recessed double contact bases of nominal overall
length of 96 inches;
(4) Any instant start lamp (commonly referred to as 8-foot slimline
lamps) with single pin bases of nominal overall length of 96 inches and
rated wattage of 49 or more;
(5) Any straight-shaped lamp (commonly referred to as 4-foot
miniature bipin standard output lamps) with miniature bipin bases of
nominal overall length between 45 and 48 inches and rated wattage of 25
or more; and
(6) Any straight-shaped lamp (commonly referred to 4-foot miniature
bipin high output lamps) with miniature bipin bases of nominal overall
length between 45 and 48 inches and rated wattage of 44 or more.
General service fluorescent lamp means any fluorescent lamp which
can be used to satisfy the majority of fluorescent lighting
applications, but does not include any lamp designed and marketed for
the following nongeneral application:
(1) Fluorescent lamps designed to promote plant growth;
(2) Fluorescent lamps specifically designed for cold temperature
applications;
(3) Colored fluorescent lamps;
(4) Impact-resistant fluorescent lamps;
(5) Reflectorized or aperture lamps;
(6) Fluorescent lamps designed for use in reprographic equipment;
(7) Lamps primarily designed to produce radiation in the ultra-
violet region of the spectrum; and
(8) Lamps with a Color Rendering Index of 87 or greater.
[[Page 25329]]
10 CFR 430.2
DOE also defines the following lamp types not included in the GSFL
definition: ``cold temperature fluorescent lamp,'' ``colored
fluorescent lamp,'' ``impact-resistant fluorescent lamp,''
``reflectorized or aperture lamp,'' ``fluorescent lamp designed for use
in reprographic equipment.'' (See 10 CFR 430.2 for complete
definitions.)
DOE defines ``incandescent reflector lamp'' as follows:
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.
10 CFR 430.2
DOE has separate definitions for ``rough or vibration service
incandescent reflector lamp'' and ``R20 short lamp.'' Additionally, DOE
uses industry standards to define the size and shape of certain
reflector lamp shapes: The bulged parabolic reflector (``BPAR'')
incandescent reflector lamp definition references ANSI C78.21-2003 \3\;
the R20 and bulged reflector (``BR'') incandescent reflector lamp
definitions reference ANSI C79.1-1994; \4\ and the elliptical reflector
(``ER'') incandescent reflector lamp definition references both ANSI
C79.1-1994 and ANSI C78.21-1989. (See 10 CFR 430.2 for complete
definitions.) There is a 2002 version available for ANSI C79.1 \5\ and
2011 version of ANSI C78.21 \6\ available. DOE is considering updating
the definitions with the latest versions of the currently referenced
industry standards. Additionally, DOE is considering providing
definitions for reflector (``R'') and parabolic aluminized reflector
(``PAR'') incandescent reflector lamps that reference the 2011 version
of ANSI C78.21.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ American National Standards Institute, American National
Standards For Electric Lamps--PAR and R Shapes. Approved October 30,
2003.
\4\ American National Standards Institute, American National
Standard for Nomenclature for Glass Bulbs-Intended for Use with
Electric Lamps, Approved March 24, 1994.
\5\ American National Standards Institute, American National
Standard For Electric Lamps--Nomenclature for Glass Bulbs Intended
for Use with Electric Lamps. Approved September 16, 2002.
\6\ American National Standards Institute, American National
Standard for Electric Lamps--PAR and R Shapes. Approved January 17,
2017.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Issue 1: DOE seeks comment on updating the industry references for
the definitions of BPAR, R20, ER, and BR incandescent reflector lamps.
DOE also seeks comments on providing a definition for R and PAR
incandescent reflector shapes.
Issue 2: DOE seeks feedback on whether the definitions for GSFLs
and IRLs require any revisions--and if so, how those definitions should
be revised. DOE also requests feedback on whether definitions related
to GSFLs and IRLs require any revisions, and if so, how these should be
revised.
Issue 3: DOE seeks comment on whether additional product
definitions are necessary to close any potential gaps in coverage
between product types. DOE also seeks input on whether such products
currently exist in the market or whether they are being planned for
introduction.
EPCA defines an incandescent reflector lamp as a lamp that ``has a
rated wattage that is 40 watts or higher'' but does not provide an
upper wattage limit. (42 U.S.C. 6291(30)(C)(ii) and (F)) Current DOE
energy conservation standards cover IRLs with rated wattages greater
than or equal to 40 watts (``W'') and less than or equal to 205 W. 10
CFR 430.32(n)(6) Based on an initial assessment of the market, IRLs
higher than 205 W comprise a small portion of product offerings.
Issue 4: DOE seeks feedback on the shipment volume of IRLs with
wattages higher than 205 W and the performance characteristics
(including wattage, lumen output, and lifetime), shape, and diameter of
IRLs in this wattage range.
2. Certain ER, BR, and R IRLs
As amended by section 322(b) of the Energy Independence and
Security Act of 2007 (``EISA 2007''; Pub. L. 110-140), EPCA exempted
certain IRLs from the statutorily prescribed standards: (1) Lamps rated
50 watts or less that are ER30, BR30, BR40, or ER40; (2) lamps rated 65
watts that are BR30, BR40, or ER40 lamps; and (3) R20 incandescent
reflector lamps rated 45 watts or less (referred to as ``certain ER,
BR, and R lamps''). (42 U.S.C. 6295(i)(1)(C))
In the 2009 GSFL-IRL ECS rulemaking, DOE initially concluded that
it was precluded from adopting energy conservation standards for the
certain ER, BR, and R lamps. 73 FR 13620, 13626 (March 13, 2008). Based
on comments received in response to the advanced notice of proposed
rulemaking (``ANOPR''), DOE re-evaluated its initial interpretation of
the statutory exemption of the certain ER, BR, and R lamps and whether
the required rulemaking cycles authorized DOE to reconsider the
exemptions. 74 FR 16920, 16930-16931 (Apr. 13, 2009). As a practical
matter, because DOE did not wish to delay the rulemaking and resulting
potential energy savings for the sole reason of considering these
certain R, ER, BR lamps, it did not include these lamps in the
analysis. Id. and 74 FR 34080, 34092.
On May 3, 2010, DOE initiated a separate rulemaking to consider
standards for these certain ER, BR, and R IRLs by issuing a notice of
public meeting and availability of a framework document. 75 FR 23191
(May 3, 2010); see also 80 FR 4042, 4050. DOE held a public meeting on
May 26, 2010, but did not publish any further documents in this docket.
In the 2015 GSFL-IRL ECS rulemaking DOE did not consider standards
for certain ER, BR, and R lamps when evaluating standards for IRLs
because they were the subject of the separate rulemaking when the 2015
GSFL-IRL ECS rulemaking was initiated in September 2011. 76 FR 56678,
56679. Subsequently, DOE suspended activity on the separate rulemaking
on the certain ER, BR, and R lamps as a result of a then applicable
Appropriations Rider (section 315 of Pub. L. 112-74 (Dec. 23, 2011)),
which prohibited DOE from using appropriated funds to implement or
enforce standards for ER, BR, and BPAR IRLs. See, 79 FR 24068, 24078
and 80 FR 4042, 4056. Also, because of the Appropriations Rider
(section 322 of Pub. L. 113-76 (January 17, 2014)), DOE did not
consider ER, BR, or BPAR IRLs (that do not fall in the certain ER, BR
and R lamp category) in the 2015 GSFL-IRL ECS rulemaking. 80 FR 4042,
4057.
The Appropriations Rider is no longer in effect.\7\ Therefore, in
this analysis DOE is considering analyzing certain ER, BR, and R IRLs.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ The Appropriations Rider expired on May 5, 2017, when the
Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2017 was enacted. See, the
Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2017 (Pub. L. 115-31, div. D,
tit. III); see also, Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2018 (Pub. L.
115-141).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
B. Market and Technology Assessment
The market and technology assessment that DOE routinely conducts
when analyzing the impacts of a potential new or amended energy
conservation standard provides information about the GSFL and IRL
industry that will be used in DOE's analysis throughout the rulemaking
process. DOE uses qualitative and quantitative information to
characterize the structure of the industry and market.
[[Page 25330]]
DOE identifies manufacturers, estimates market shares and trends,
addresses regulatory and non-regulatory initiatives intended to improve
energy efficiency or reduce energy consumption, and explores the
potential for efficiency improvements in the design and manufacturing
of GSFLs and IRLs. Additionally, DOE considers conducting interviews
with manufacturers to improve its assessment of the market and
available technologies for GSFLs and IRLs.
1. Product Classes
When evaluating and establishing energy conservation standards, DOE
may divide covered products into product classes by the type of energy
used, or by capacity or other performance-related features that justify
a standard higher or lower than that which applies (or would apply) for
such type (or class) for any group of covered products which have the
same function or intended use. (42 U.S.C. 6295(q)) In making a
determination whether capacity or another performance-related feature
justifies a separate product class, DOE must consider such factors as
the utility of the feature to the consumer and other factors DOE deems
appropriate. (Id.) Current standards for IRLs and GSFLs require
products to meet a minimum lamp efficacy (lumens divided by wattage
[``lm/W'']). To identify product-class setting factors, DOE examined
performance features that offer a unique utility and would impact lamp
efficacy, and thereby energy consumption.
For GSFLs, the current energy conservation standards specified in
10 CFR 430.32(n)(4) are based on 12 product classes as analyzed in the
2015 GSFL-IRL ECS final rule, separated according to the following
three factors: (1) Correlated color temperature (``CCT''); (2) physical
constraints of lamps (i.e., lamp shape and length); and (3) lumen
package (i.e., standard output (``SO'') versus high output (``HO'')).
80 FR 4042, 4063. Table II.1 lists the current 12 product classes for
GSFLs.
Table II.1--Current GSFL Product Classes
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Lamp type CCT
------------------------------------------------------------------------
4-foot medium bipin.............. <=4,500 K
>4,500 K and <=7,000 K
2-foot U-shaped.................. <=4,500 K
>4,500 K and <=7,000 K
8-foot single pin slimline....... <=4,500 K
>4,500 K and <=7,000 K
8-foot recessed double contact <=4,500 K
high output. >4,500 K and <=7,000 K
4-foot T5, miniature bipin <=4,500 K
standard output. >4,500 K and <=7,000 K
4-foot T5, miniature bipin high <=4,500 K
output. >4,500 K and <=7,000 K
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Issue 5: DOE requests feedback on the current GSFL product classes
and whether changes to these individual product classes and their
descriptions should be made or whether certain classes should be merged
or separated. DOE further requests feedback on whether combining or
separating certain classes could impact product utility by eliminating
any performance-related features or impact the stringency of the
current energy conservation standard for these products.
Issue 6: DOE seeks information regarding any other new product
classes it should consider for inclusion in its analysis of GSFLs.
Specifically, DOE requests information on the performance-related
features (e.g., dimmability, lifetime, etc.) that provide unique
consumer utility and data detailing the corresponding impacts on energy
use that would justify separate product classes (i.e., explanation for
why the presence of these performance-related features would increase
energy consumption).
Issue 7: DOE seeks information on whether there are issues with
dimming reduced wattage GSFLs, and if so, what are the specific issues
and for what types of GSFLs do they occur.
Issue 8: DOE requests information regarding the maximum efficacy
achievable by 2-foot U-shaped lamps with 1 \5/8\ inch spacing versus
those with 6 inch spacing and the utility that each offer consumers.
DOE seeks information on the shipment volume of 2-foot U-shaped lamps
with 1 \5/8\ inch spacing \8\ versus those with 6 inch spacing.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\ Spacing refers to the length between the legs of a U-shaped
fluorescent lamp.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
For IRLs, the current energy conservation standards specified in 10
CFR 430.2(n) are based on 8 product classes as analyzed in the 2015
GSFL-IRL ECS final rule, separated according to the following three
factors: (1) Rated voltage; (2) lamp spectrum; and (3) lamp diameter.
80 FR 4042, 4063-4064. Table II.2 lists the current product classes for
IRLs.
Table II.2--Current IRL Product Classes
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Diameter (in
Lamp type inches) Input voltage
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Standard Spectrum............ >2.5 >=125 Volts (V)
<125 V
<=2.5 >=125 V
<125 V
Modified Spectrum............ >2.5 >=125 V
<125 V
[[Page 25331]]
<=2.5 >=125 V
<125 V
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Issue 9: DOE requests feedback on the current IRL product classes
and whether changes to these individual product classes and their
descriptions should be made or whether certain classes should be merged
or separated. DOE further requests feedback on whether combining or
separating certain classes could impact product utility by eliminating
any performance-related features or impact the stringency of the
current energy conservation standard for these products.
Issue 10: DOE seeks information regarding any other new product
classes it should consider for inclusion in its analysis of IRLs.
Specifically, DOE requests information on performance-related features
(e.g., length, beam spread, etc.) that provide unique consumer utility
and data detailing the corresponding impacts on energy use that would
justify separate product classes (i.e., explanation for why the
presence of these performance-related features would increase energy
consumption).
Issue 11: DOE requests information regarding the maximum efficacy
achievable by the certain ER, BR, and R lamps newly included in this
analysis and whether ER, BR, and R lamps offer the consumer unique
utility. DOE also requests information regarding the shipments of the
certain ER, BR, and R lamps exempt from current standards compared to
the shipments of other ER, BR, and R lamps that must comply with
current standards.
2. Technology Assessment
In analyzing the feasibility of potential new or amended energy
conservation standards, DOE uses information about existing and past
technology options and prototype designs to help identify technologies
that manufacturers could use to meet and/or exceed a given set of
energy conservation standards under consideration. In consultation with
interested parties, DOE intends to develop a list of technologies to
consider in its analysis. That analysis will likely include a number of
the technology options DOE previously considered during its most recent
rulemaking for GSFLs and IRLs. A complete list of those prior options
appears in Table II.3 for GSFLs and Table II.4 for IRLs of this RFI.
Table II.3--GSFL Technology Options From the 2015 GSFL-IRL ECS Final
Rule
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Name of technology option Description
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Highly Emissive Electrode Coatings Improved electrode coatings allow
electrons to be more easily removed
from electrodes, reducing lamp
power and increasing overall
efficacy.
Higher Efficiency Lamp Fill Gas Fill gas compositions improve
Composition. cathode thermionic emission or
increase mobility of ions and
electrons in the lamp plasma.
Higher Efficiency Phosphors....... Phosphors increase the conversion of
ultraviolet light into visible
light.
Glass Coatings.................... Coatings on inside of bulb enable
the phosphors to absorb more UV
energy, so that they emit more
visible light.
Higher Efficiency Lamp Diameter... Optimal lamp diameters improve lamp
efficacy.
Multi-Photon Phosphors............ Phosphors emit more than one visible
photon for each incident UV photon.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Table II.4--IRL Technology Options From the 2015 GSFL-IRL ECS Final Rule
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Name of technology option Description
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Higher Temperature Operation...... Operating the filament at higher
temperatures, the spectral output
shifts to lower wavelengths,
increasing its overlap with the eye
sensitivity curve.
Microcavity Filaments............. Texturing, surface perforations,
microcavity holes with material
fillings, increasing surface area
and thereby light output.
Novel Filament Materials.......... More efficient filament alloys that
have a high melting point, low
vapor pressure, high strength, high
ductility, or good radiating
characteristics.
Thinner Filaments................. Thinner filaments to increase
operating temperature. This measure
may shorten the operating life of
the lamp.
Crystallite Filament Coatings..... Layers of micron or submicron
crystallites deposited on the
filament surface that increases
emissivity of the filament.
Higher Efficiency Inert Fill Gas.. Filling lamps with alternative
gases, such as Krypton, to reduce
heat conduction.
Higher Pressure Tungsten-Halogen Increased halogen bulb burner
Lamps. pressurization, allowing higher
temperature operation.
Non-Tungsten-Halogen Regenerative Novel filament materials that
Cycles. regenerate.
Infrared Glass Coatings........... When used with a halogen burner,
this is referred to as an HIR lamp.
Infrared coatings on the inside of
the bulb to reflect some of the
radiant energy back onto the
filament.
IR Phosphor Glass Coatings........ Phosphor coatings that can absorb IR
radiation and re-emit it at shorter
wavelengths (visible region of
light), increasing the lumen
output.
UV Phosphor Glass Coatings........ Phosphor coatings that convert UV
radiation into longer wavelengths
(visible region of light),
increasing the lumen output.
[[Page 25332]]
Electron Stimulated Luminescence.. A low voltage cathodoluminescent
phosphor that emits green light
(visible region of light) upon
impingement by thermally ejected
electrons, increasing the lumen
output.
Higher Efficiency Reflector Alternative reflector coatings such
Coatings. as silver, with higher reflectivity
increase the amount of directed
light.
Corner Reflectors................. Individual corner reflectors in the
cover glass that reflect light
directly back in the direction from
which it came.
High Reflectance Filament Supports Filament supports that include a
reflective face that reflects light
to another filament, the reflective
face of another filament support,
or radially outward.
Permanent Infrared Reflector Permanent shroud with an IR
Coating Shroud. reflector coating and a removable
and replaceable lamp can increase
efficiency while reducing
manufacturing costs by allowing IR
reflector coatings to be reused.
Higher Efficiency Burners......... A double-ended burner that features
a lead wire outside of the burner,
where it does not interfere with
the reflectance of energy from the
burner wall back to the burner
filament in HIR lamps.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Issue 12: DOE seeks information on the technologies listed in Table
II.3 and Table II.4 of this RFI regarding their applicability to the
current market and how these technologies may impact the efficacy of
GSFLs and IRLs (including certain ER, BR, and R IRLs) as measured
according to the DOE test procedure. DOE also seeks information on how
these technologies may have changed since they were considered in the
2015 GSFL-IRL ECS final rule analysis. Specifically, DOE seeks
information on the range of efficiencies or performance characteristics
that are currently available for each technology option.
Issue 13: DOE seeks information on the technologies listed in Table
II.3 and Table II.4 of this RFI regarding their market adoption, costs,
and any concerns with incorporating them into products (e.g., impacts
on consumer utility, potential safety concerns, manufacturing/
production/implementation issues, etc.), particularly as to changes
that may have occurred since the 2015 GSFL-IRL ECS final rule analysis.
Issue 14: DOE seeks comment on other technology options that it
should consider for inclusion in its analysis and if these technologies
may impact product features or consumer utility.
C. Screening Analysis
The purpose of the screening analysis is to evaluate the
technologies that improve lamp efficacy to determine which technologies
will be eliminated from further consideration and which will be passed
to the engineering analysis for further consideration.
DOE determines whether to eliminate certain technology options from
further consideration based on the following criteria:
(1) Technological feasibility. Technologies that are not
incorporated in commercial products or in working prototypes will not
be considered further.
(2) Practicability to manufacture, install, and service. If it is
determined that mass production of a technology in commercial products
and reliable installation and servicing of the technology could not be
achieved on the scale necessary to serve the relevant market at the
time of the compliance date of the standard, then that technology will
not be considered further.
(3) Adverse impacts on product utility or product availability. If
a technology is determined to have significant adverse impact on the
utility of the product to significant subgroups of consumers, or result
in the unavailability of any covered product type with performance
characteristics (including reliability), features, sizes, capacities,
and volumes that are substantially the same as equipment generally
available in the United States at the time, it will not be considered
further.
(4) Adverse impacts on health or safety. If it is determined that a
technology will have significant adverse impacts on health or safety,
it will not be considered further.
10 CFR part 430, subpart C, appendix A, 4(a)(4) and 5(b).
Technology options identified in the technology assessment are
evaluated against these criteria using DOE analysis and inputs from
interested parties (e.g., manufacturers, trade organizations, and
energy efficiency advocates). Technologies that pass through the
screening analysis are referred to as ``design options'' in the
engineering analysis. Technology options that fail to meet one or more
of the four criteria are eliminated from consideration.
Additionally, DOE notes that the four screening criteria do not
directly address the proprietary status of technology options. DOE only
considers potential efficiency levels achieved through the use of
proprietary designs in the engineering analysis if they are not part of
a unique pathway to achieve that efficiency level (i.e., if there are
other non-proprietary technologies capable of achieving the same
efficiency level).
Table II.5 and Table II.6 of this RFI summarize the technology
options that DOE screened out in the 2015 GSFL-IRL ECS final rule, and
the applicable screening criteria.
Table II.5--Screened Out GSFL Technology Options From the 2015 GSFL-IRL ECS Final Rule
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
EPCA Criteria (X = Basis for Screening Out)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Practicability Adverse
Technological to manufacture, Adverse impact impacts on
Screened technology option feasibility install, and on product health and
service utility safety
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Multi-Photon Phosphors...................... X X ............... ...............
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 25333]]
Table II.6--Screened Out IRL Technology Options From the 2015 GSFL-IRL ECS Final Rule
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
EPCA Criteria (X = Basis for Screening Out)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Practicability
to Adverse impact Adverse
Screened technology option Technological manufacture, on product impacts on
feasibility install, and utility health and
service safety
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Microcavity Filaments........................... X X X ..............
Novel Filament Materials........................ X X X ..............
Crystallite Filament Coatings................... X X .............. ..............
Non-Tungsten-Halogen Regenerative Cycles........ X X X ..............
Infrared Phosphor Glass Coating................. X X .............. ..............
Ultraviolet Phosphor Glass Coating.............. X X .............. ..............
Electron Stimulated Luminescence................ X X .............. ..............
Corner Reflectors............................... X X .............. ..............
High Reflectance Filament Supports.............. X X .............. ..............
Permanent Infrared Reflector Coating Shroud..... X X .............. ..............
Higher Efficiency Burners for Small Diameter .............. .............. X ..............
IRLs (less than or equal to 2.5 inches)........
High Efficiency Gold Reflector Coatings......... .............. .............. X ..............
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Issue 15: With respect to the screened out technology options
listed in Table II.5 and Table II.6 of this RFI, DOE seeks information
on whether these options would, based on current and projected
assessments regarding each of them, remain screened out for GSFLs and
IRLs (including certain ER, BR, and R lamps) under the four screening
criteria described in this section. With respect to each of these
technology options, what steps, if any, could be (or have already been)
taken to facilitate the introduction of each option as a means to
improve the energy performance of GSFLs and IRLs and the potential to
impact consumer utility of the GSFLs and IRLs.
Issue 16: DOE seeks information regarding how the screening
criteria would affect any other technology options not already
identified in this document with respect to their potential use in
GSFLs and IRLs (including certain ER, BR, and R lamps).
D. Engineering Analysis
The engineering analysis estimates the cost-efficiency relationship
of products at different levels of increased energy efficacy
(``efficacy levels''). This relationship serves as the basis for the
cost-benefit calculations for customers, manufacturers, and the Nation.
In determining the cost-efficiency relationship, DOE estimates the
increase in manufacturer production cost (``MPC'') associated with
increasing the efficiency of product above the baseline, up to the
maximum technologically feasible (``max-tech'') efficacy level for each
product class.
DOE historically has used the following three methodologies to
generate incremental manufacturing costs and establish efficacy levels
(``ELs'') for analysis: (1) The design-option approach, which provides
the incremental costs of adding to a baseline model design options that
will improve its efficacy; (2) the efficacy-level approach, which
provides the relative costs of achieving increases in efficacy levels,
without regard to the particular design options used to achieve such
increases; and (3) the cost-assessment (or reverse engineering)
approach, which provides ``bottom-up'' manufacturing cost assessments
for achieving various levels of increased efficacy, based on detailed
cost data for parts and material, labor, shipping/packaging, and
investment for models that operate at particular efficacy levels.
Because GSFLs and IRLs are difficult to reverse-engineer (i.e., not
easily disassembled), DOE is considering directly deriving end-user
prices for the lamps covered in this evaluation. Specifically, DOE is
considering deriving ELs in the engineering analysis and end-user
prices in the product price determination. By combining the results of
the engineering analysis and the product price determination, DOE can
derive typical inputs for use in the life-cycle cost (``LCC'') analysis
and national impact analysis (``NIA'').
1. Representative Product Classes
For the 2015 GSFL-IRL ECS final rule, DOE did not analyze all GSFL
and IRL product classes. Rather, DOE identified and focused on
representative product classes and then scaled the ELs from
representative product classes to those product classes it did not
analyze directly (see section II.D.4 for further details on scaling).
For GSFLs, DOE identified lamps with CCTs less than 4,500 K (with the
exception of the 2-foot U-shaped lamps) as representative product
classes due to their high market volume. 80 FR 4042, 4067. For IRLs,
DOE identified standard spectrum lamps, with diameters greater than 2.5
inches, and input voltage less than 125 V as the representative product
class due to their high market volume. 80 FR 4042, 4075. Consistent
with this approach, DOE tentatively plans to analyze the aforementioned
product classes as representative.
2. Baseline lamps
For each representative product class, DOE selects a baseline lamp
as a reference point against which any changes resulting from new or
amended energy conservation standards can be measured. Typically, a
baseline model is the most common, least efficacious lamp sold in a
given product class. DOE also considers other lamp characteristics in
choosing the most appropriate baseline for each product class such as
wattage, lumen output, and lifetime.
Consistent with this analytical approach, DOE tentatively plans to
consider the current minimum energy conservation standards (which were
required for compliance starting on January 26, 2018 for GSFLs and July
14, 2012 for IRLs) to establish the baseline model for each product
class. As noted previously, the current GSFL and IRL standards are
based on lamp efficacy. The current standards for GSFLs are found in 10
CFR 430.32(n)(4) and for IRLs in 10 CFR 430.32(n)(6). DOE tentatively
plans to identify efficacies of products from the DOE's Compliance
Certification Management System (``CCMS'') database.
Issue 17: DOE requests feedback on whether the current energy
conservation standards for GSFLs and IRLs provide an appropriate
baseline efficiency level
[[Page 25334]]
for DOE to use in evaluating whether to amend the current energy
conservation standards for any of the product classes regulated by DOE.
DOE requests data and suggestions to select the baseline models in
order to better evaluate amending energy conservation standards for
GSFLs and IRLs. In particular, DOE requests comment on the most common
wattages, diameters, lifetimes, and features of GSFLs and IRLs
(including certain ER, BR, and R lamps) sold today and whether these
characteristics vary in popularity based on the region in which the
lamps are sold.
Issue 18: DOE requests feedback on how to determine baseline models
for product classes that have lamps with minimum efficacies above the
existing standard (i.e., T5 SO and T5 HO lamps).
Issue 19: DOE requests feedback on the appropriate baseline models
for any newly analyzed product classes for which standards are not
currently in place or for the contemplated combined product classes, as
discussed in II.B.1 of this document.
3. Efficacy Levels and Maximum Technologically Feasible Levels
In the 2015 GSFL-IRL final rule, for GSFLs, DOE selected more
efficacious substitutes with characteristics (e.g., CCT, color
rendering index [``CRI''], lifetime) as similar as possible to the
baseline lamps. 80 FR 4042, 4067. DOE also ensured that full wattage
lamps could meet each EL. 80 FR 4042, 4069-4070. Because fluorescent
lamps operate on a ballast in practice, to capture real-world energy
use and light output, DOE analyzed lamp-and-ballast systems in the
engineering analysis. DOE analyzed more efficacious systems that
maintain mean lumen output within 10 percent of the baseline, when
possible.
For IRLs, in the GSFL-IRL ECS final rule, DOE considered substitute
lamps that saved energy and, where possible, had a light output within
10 percent of the baseline lamp's light output. Id. at 80 FR 4076. For
IRLs, DOE developed a continuous equation that specifies a minimum
efficacy requirement across wattages and represents the potential
efficacy a lamp can achieve using a particular design option.
In the 2015 GSFL-IRL ECS final rule, after identifying more
efficacious substitutes for each baseline model, DOE developed ELs. DOE
developed ELs based on: (1) The design options associated with the
specific lamps studied; (2) the ability of lamps across wattages to
comply with the standard level of a given product class; \9\ and (3)
the maximum technologically feasible efficacy level or ``max-tech''.
For GSFLs, DOE used initial lumens from manufacturer catalogs and ANSI
wattages, where possible, to develop initial ELs. DOE then compared
these ELs to CCMS data and adjusted levels downward as necessary.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\9\ Efficacy levels span multiple lamps of different wattages.
In selecting ELs, DOE considered whether these multiple lamps can
meet the standard levels.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In the 2015 GSFL-IRL ECS final rule, for GSFLs, DOE adopted the
highest efficiency levels for the 4-foot MBP, 4-foot T5 SO, and 4-foot
T5 HO product classes, requiring the use of 800 series rare earth
phosphors for full wattage lamps. DOE maintained the baseline level for
the 8-foot SP slimline product class, representing the use of less
efficacious 800 series rare earth phosphors for full wattage lamps. DOE
also maintained the baseline level for the 8-foot RDC HO product class,
representing the use of less efficacious 700 series rare earth
phosphors for full wattage lamps. This combination of ELs for the GSFL
product classes represented the maximum net present value (``NPV'').
In the 2015 GSFL-IRL ECS final rule, DOE proposed one EL
representing the use of either a halogen infrared (``HIR'') lamp with a
lifetime of 2,500 hours or an improved HIR lamp that may utilize
improvements in reflector coatings with a lifetime of 4,200 hours.
However, DOE did not adopt this EL because of the potential reduction
in industry value and potential negative costs to the consumer in the
scenario where manufacturers shortened the lifetime of IRLs. Instead,
DOE maintained the baseline level requiring the use of a halogen lamp
with a lifetime of 1,500 hours that utilizes a higher efficiency inert
fill gas and a higher efficiency reflector coating.
The maximum available efficacies for the analyzed product classes
from the 2015 GSFL-IRL ECS final rule are included in Table II.7 for
GSFLs, and Table II.8 of this RFI.
Table II.7--GSFL Maximum Efficacy Levels From the 2015 GSFL-IRL ECS
Final Rule
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Efficacy level
CCT Lamp type (lumens/watt)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
<= 4,500 K........................ 4-foot medium bipin. 92.4
8-foot single pin 99.0 *
slimline.
8-foot recessed 97.6 *
double contact HO.
4-foot T5 miniature 95.0
bipin SO.
4-foot T5 miniature 82.7
bipin HO.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* indicates maximum efficacy levels not adopted in the 2015 GSFL-IRL ECS
final rule.
Table II.8--IRL Maximum Efficacy Levels from the 2015 GSFL-IRL ECS Final Rule
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Lamp type Diameter Voltage EL 1
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Standard spectrum............................................... > 2.5 inches < 125 V 6.2P 0.27 *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
P = rated wattage; * indicates maximum efficacy levels not adopted in the 2015 GSFL-IRL ECS final rule.
DOE defines a max-tech efficacy level to represent the theoretical
maximum possible efficacy if all available design options are
incorporated in a model. In the 2015 GSFL-IRL ECS rule all max-tech
levels analyzed were commercially available. In many cases, the max-
tech efficiency level is not commercially available because it is not
economically feasible. Since the 2015 GSFL-IRL ECS final rule, DOE
found, compared to values in Table II.7 of this RFI, GSFLs that
indicate a 6 percent increase in efficacy for the 4-foot MBP product
class, a 3 percent increase in efficacy for the 8-foot SP slimline
product class, an 11 percent increase in efficacy for the 8-foot RDC HO
product class, a 4 percent increase in efficacy for the 4-foot T5
miniature bipin (MiniBP) SO product class, and a 17 percent increase in
efficacy for the 4-foot T5 MiniBP HO product class. Since the GSFL-IRL
ECS final rule, DOE found, compared to the value in Table II.8 of this
RFI, IRLs that indicate a 5 percent increase in efficacy for the
standard spectrum, > 2.5 inches
[[Page 25335]]
diameter, < 125 V rated voltage product class.
Issue 20: DOE seeks input on the maximum achievable efficacy levels
for GSFLs and IRLs (including certain ER, BR, and R lamps).
Issue 21: DOE seeks feedback on what design options would be
incorporated at a max-tech efficacy level, and the efficacies
associated with those levels. As part of this request, DOE also seeks
information as to whether there are limitations on the use of certain
combinations of design options.
4. Scaling to Other Product Classes
As noted previously, for the GSFL-IRL ECS final rule DOE analyzed
the representative product classes directly. DOE then scaled the levels
developed for the representative product classes to determine levels
for product classes not analyzed directly.
For GSFLs, in the 2015 GSFL-IRL ECS final rule, DOE did not
directly analyze the 2-foot U-shaped lamps, and instead established ELs
for this product class by scaling from ELs developed for the 4-foot MBP
product class. DOE developed the scaling factor by comparing the
efficacy of 2-foot U-shaped GSLs and the equivalent 4-foot MBP GSLs
with the only difference between the two lamp types being the shape.
For scaling ELs in the 4-foot MBP product class to ELs for the 2-foot
MBP product class, DOE determined an average efficacy reduction of 8
percent. DOE also did not directly analyze lamps with CCTs greater than
4,500K and instead scaled the efficacy levels from lamps with CCTs less
than or equal to 4,500K. DOE developed scaling factors for each product
class with the higher CCT value by identifying pairs of the same lamp
type differing only by CCT. DOE determined an average efficacy
reduction of 4 percent for the 4-foot MBP product class, 2 percent for
the 2-foot U-shaped product class, 3 percent for the 8-foot SP slimline
product class, 4 percent for the 8-foot RDC HO product class, 6 percent
for the T5 MiniBP SO product class, and 7 percent for the T5 MiniBP HO
product class. 80 FR 4042, 4074; see 2015 GSFL-IRL ECS final rule
chapter 5 technical support document (``TSD'').\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\10\ The 205 GSFL-IRL ECS final rule TSD is available at:
https://www.regulations.gov/document?D=EERE-2011-BT-STD-0006-0066.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Issue 22: DOE requests feedback on the average efficacy difference
between 2-foot MBP and 4-foot MBP lamps, where the only difference is
shape; and between lamps with CCT less than or equal to 4,500K and CCT
greater than 4,500K, where the only difference is CCT.
For IRLs, in the 2015 GSFL-IRL ECS final rule, DOE did not directly
analyze modified spectrum IRLs, and instead established ELs for this
product class by scaling from the ELs developed for the standard
spectrum product class. DOE developed a scaling factor by comparing
pairs of standard spectrum and modified spectrum IRLs, where each pair
had the same bulb shape, rated life, rated voltage, and filament shape,
and differed only in spectrum. DOE determined that an efficacy
reduction of 15 percent was appropriate. 80 FR 4042, 4081.
DOE also did not directly analyze IRLs with diameters less than or
equal to 2.5 inches, and instead established ELs for this product class
by scaling from the ELs developed for the IRL product class with
diameters greater than 2.5 inches. DOE developed a scaling factor by
comparing the halogen PAR20 lamp (the most common IRL with a diameter
less than or equal to 2.5 inches) with the same type of halogen PAR30
or PAR38. For scaling IRLs with smaller diameters with larger
diameters, DOE determined an average efficacy reduction of 12 percent.
DOE also did not directly analyze IRLs with rated voltages greater
than or equal to 125 V, and instead established ELs for this product
class by scaling from the ELs developed for the IRL product class with
rated voltages less than 125 V. Most consumers operate 130 V lamps at
120 V, which slightly decreases their efficacy but increases their
lifetime. DOE developed a scaling factor by using the Illuminating
Engineering Society of North America (IESNA) Lighting Handbook
equations that relate lifetime, lumens, and wattage to voltage of
incandescent lamps to represent the potential increase in efficacy of a
130 V lamp operated at 120 V. Specifically, the scaling factor captured
the difference in efficacy between a 130 V lamp operating at 130 V and
a 130 V lamp operating at 120 V with the same lifetime as the lamps
analyzed in the 120 V product class. Id. at 4080-1.
Issue 23: DOE requests feedback, including any relevant data, on
the average efficacy difference between the standard and modified
spectrum IRLs, where the only difference is spectrum; between IRLs with
diameters less than or equal to 2.5 inches and greater than 2.5 inches,
where the only difference is diameter; and between IRLs with rated
voltages less than or equal to 125 V and greater than 125 V, where the
only difference is rated voltage.
E. Product Price Determination
In generating end-user price inputs for the LCC analysis and NIA,
DOE must identify distribution channels (i.e., how the products are
distributed from the manufacturer to the consumer), and estimate
relative sales volumes through each channel. In the 2015 GSFL-IRL ECS
final rule, DOE determined end-user prices for GSFLs and IRLs by
gathering publicly available pricing data. DOE identified three main
distribution channels through which GSFLs and IRLs are sold and their
relative price range: (1) State procurement (low prices), (2) large
retail distributors (medium prices), and (3) internet retailers (high
prices). Based on manufacturer feedback, DOE determined an aggregated
percentage of shipments that go through each of the main channels for
GSFLs and IRLs: 10 Percent for state procurement, 85 percent for large
distributors, and 5 percent for internet retailers. DOE then applied
these percentages respectively to the average low price determined
state procurement, average medium price determined for large
distributors, and the average high price determined for internet
retailers. The sum of these weighted prices was used as the average
consumer price for GSFLs and IRLs in the main LCC analysis and NIA. 80
FR 4042, 4082. See also chapter 7 of the 2015 GSFL-IRL ECS final rule
TSD.
Issue 24: DOE requests comments on the described methodology for
the pricing analysis, as well as information on the existence of any
distribution channels other than those described and their assigned
weighting. DOE also requests information on whether this methodology is
appropriate for certain ER, BR, and R IRLs.
F. Energy Use Analysis
As part of the rulemaking process, DOE conducts an energy use
analysis to identify how products are used by consumers, and thereby
determine the energy savings potential of energy efficiency
improvements. In the 2015 GSFL-IRL ECS final rule, to develop annual
energy-use estimates, DOE multiplied annual usage (in hours per year)
by the lamp power (in watts) for IRLs and the lamp-and-ballast system
input power (in watts) for GSFLs. DOE characterized representative lamp
or lamp-and-ballast systems in the engineering analysis. 80 FR 4042,
4082. For GSFLs, DOE considered two different lamp-and-ballast system
scenarios: (1) A lamp replacement scenario in which the consumer
selects a reduced wattage replacement lamp that can operate on the
installed ballast
[[Page 25336]]
and (2) a lamp-and-ballast replacement scenario in which the consumer
selects a lamp that has the same or lower wattage compared to the
baseline lamp and also selects a new ballast with improved performance
characteristics. DOE selected lamp-and-ballast systems that maintained
mean lumen output within 10 percent of the baseline system, when
possible, giving priority to energy savings. 80 FR 4042, 4068.
To characterize the country's average use of lamps for a typical
year, in the 2015 GSFL-IRL ECS final rule, DOE developed annual
operating hour distributions by sector, using data published in the
2010 U.S. Lighting Market Characterization report (``2010 LMC''), the
Commercial Building Energy Consumption Survey (``CBECS''), the
Manufacturer Energy Consumption Survey (``MECS''), and the Residential
Energy Consumption Survey (``RECS''). Because the 2010 LMC operating
hour data used is based on building surveys and metering data, it
accounted for the use of occupancy sensors. 80 FR 4042, 4082.
Table II.9 provides the operating hours from the 2015 GSFL-IRL ECS
final rule.
Table II.9--Average Operating Hours by Sector and Lamp Type From the
2015 GSFL-IRL ECS Final Rule
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Average annual
Sector Lamp type operating
hours hr/year
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Residential....................... GSFL................ 634
IRL................. 763
Commercial........................ GSFL................ 4,065
IRL................. 4,532
Industrial........................ GSFL................ 4,586
------------------------------------------------------------------------
DOE did account for the use of dimmers or light sensors by modeling
GSFLs and IRLs on dimmers and developing associated energy-use results
as a sensitivity analysis. For GSFLs, DOE determined that the average
reduction of system lumen output for GSFLs was 33 percent, based on
research and manufacturer input. For IRLs, DOE modeled two scenarios:
(1) All lamps are on dimmers and on average consumers using dimmers
reduce lamp wattage by 20 percent, corresponding to a lumen reduction
of 25 percent and an increase in lifetime by a factor of 3.94 at the
baseline and (2) there is a distribution of lamps on dimmers and
weighted-average characteristics were determined based on estimated
percentage of IRLs that operate on dimmers and sensors (29 percent for
residential sector, 5 percent for commercial sector). 80 FR 4042, 4083.
See also, chapter 6 of the 2015 GSFL-IRL ECS final rule TSD.
Issue 25: DOE seeks feedback on the average annual operating hours
for GSFLs and IRLs (including certain ER, BR and R lamps) by sector,
and whether the values in Table II.9 continue to be adequate for future
potential analyses. Please provide relevant data in support of whatever
alternative values that DOE should use in lieu of its values listed in
these tables.
Issue 26: DOE seeks feedback on its methodology and data used to
determine impact of lighting controls for GSFLs and IRLs (including
certain ER, BR, and R lamps), and whether it is adequate for future
potential analyses.
Issue 27: DOE seeks feedback on any type of lighting control not
mentioned that should be included in future potential analyses of GSFLs
or IRLs (e.g., smart controls). Please provide relevant supporting data
including how it is distinct from or works in conjunction with dimmers
or sensors, prevalence of use by sector, and associated annual
operating hours.
G. Life-Cycle Cost and Payback Analysis
DOE conducts the LCC and payback period (``PBP'') analysis to
evaluate the economic impacts of potential energy conservation
standards for GSFLs and IRLs on individual customers. For any given
efficacy level, DOE measures the PBP and the change in LCC relative to
an estimated baseline level. The LCC is the total consumer expense over
the life of the product, consisting of purchase, installation, and
operating costs (expenses for energy use, maintenance, and repair).
Inputs to the calculation of total installed cost include cost of the
product--which includes consumer product price and sales taxes--and
installation costs. Inputs to the calculation of operating expenses
include annual energy consumption, energy prices and price projections,
repair and maintenance costs, product lifetimes, discount rates, and
the year that compliance with amended standards is required.
In the 2015 GSFL-IRL ECS final rule, DOE defined lifetime as the
age in hours of operation when a lamp or ballast is retired from
service. DOE used manufacturer literature to determine lamp lifetimes.
Additionally, DOE assumed that a GSFL subject to group relamping \11\
operates for 75 percent of its rated lifetime. For average ballast
lifetime, DOE used 15 years for the residential sector and 49,054 hours
for the commercial sector. 80 FR 4042, 4087-4088. See also chapter 8 of
the 2015 GSFL-IRL ECS final rule TSD.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\11\ Group relamping refers to the scenario when consumers
replace all the lamps in a fixture or area at a predetermined time.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In the 2015 GSFL-IRL ECS final rule, DOE determined LCC savings for
GSFLs under three different consumer purchasing events: (1) Lamp
failure, when in a standards scenario a consumer must purchase a
standards-compliant lamp that operates on the existing ballast; (2)
ballast failure, when in a standards scenario a consumer must purchase
a standards-compliant lamp-and-ballast combination such that the system
light output stays within 10 percent of the baseline system; (3) new
construction and renovation, when light design can be completely new
(assuming spacing between lamps does not change) and a consumer must
purchase all new fixture installations. Only lamp purchase events were
applicable to IRLs, which do not use a ballast. 80 FR 4041, 4087. See
also chapter 8 of the 2015 GSFL-IRL ECS final rule TSD.
Issue 28: DOE seeks feedback on the described methodology for
determining lifetime (including whether other factors not mentioned may
affect lifetime), the frequency of group relamping, and ballast
lifetimes for GSFLs, and whether it is valid for use in potential
future analyses.
[[Page 25337]]
Issue 29: DOE seeks feedback on GSFL and IRL purchasing events for
which LCC savings should be determined and information on any other
typical purchasing events other than those described.
H. Shipments
DOE develops shipment forecasts of GSFLs and IRLs to calculate the
national impacts of potential amended energy conservation standards on
energy consumption, NPV, and future manufacturer cash flows. DOE
develops shipment projections based on historical data and an analysis
of key market drivers for each product. Historical shipment data are
used to build up a product stock and also to calibrate the shipments
model. The shipments model projects shipments over a 30-year analysis
period for the base case (no new standards) and for all standards
cases.
In the 2015 GSFL-IRL ECS final rule, separate shipment projections
were calculated for the residential sector and for the commercial and
industrial sectors. The shipments model used to estimate GSFL and IRL
lamp shipments had four main interacting elements: (1) A lamp demand
module that estimated the demand for GSFL and IRL lighting for each
year of the analysis period; (2) a price-learning module, which
projected future prices based on historic price trends; (3)
substitution matrices, which specified the product choices available to
consumers (lamps as well as lamp-and-ballast combinations for
fluorescent lamps) depending on whether they are renovating, in new
construction, or replacements; and (4) a market-share module that
assigned shipments to product classes, ballasts, and lamp options,
based on consumer sensitivities to first costs (prices) and operation
and maintenance costs. 80 FR 4042, 4089.
For GSFLs, DOE projected that in cases of renovation or new
construction, some fraction of the lighting market being served by T8
lamps will migrate to T5 lamps in the absence of standards.
Additionally, DOE allowed all full wattage and reduced wattage lamp
versions of the 4-foot MBP lamp type to be coupled to dimming ballasts;
with the latter limited to 10 percent of the dimming ballast system
market due to performance issues. For the GSFL reference scenario, DOE
used the most recent price data (June 2014) for rare earth phosphors
(``REO'') but also conducted a sensitivity analysis where the average
rare earth phosphor price was 4.5 times the reference level.
For IRLs, DOE assumed all potential switching from PAR to BR lamps
had already taken place and accounted for some consumers shifting to
light emitting diode (``LED'') lamps with the use of an LED market
adoption curve. For additional detail in the development of shipments
data in the 2015 GSFL-IRL ECS final rule see chapter 11 of the 2015
GSFL-IRL ECS final rule TSD.
Issue 30: DOE requests information on the migration of GSFL lamp
types among GSFL product classes and to exempt products (e.g., high CRI
linear fluorescent lamps) or to other lamp technologies and suggestions
on how to account for such shifts in its shipment model.
Issue 31: DOE requests information on migration of IRL lamp types
among IRL product classes and to exempt products or to other lamp
technologies and suggestions on how to account for such shifts in its
shipment model.
Table II.10 and Table II.11 of this RFI, respectively, provide GSFL
and IRL shipment projections from the 2015 GSFL-IRL ECS final rule for
the years 2017 through 2019.
Table II.10--Projected GSFL Shipments From the 2015 GSFL-IRL ECS Final Rule
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Lamp type 2017 2018 2019
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
4-ft Medium Bipin (Commercial/Industrial)....................... 295,498 292,682 288,025
4-ft Medium Bipin (Residential)................................. 14,094 13,221 12,564
8-ft Slimline................................................... 11,734 11,129 10,858
8-ft High Output................................................ 3,340 2,937 2,546
T5 Standard Output.............................................. 40,565 43,493 45,905
T5 High Output.................................................. 31,646 33,266 34,493
U-shaped........................................................ 14,194 14,086 13,908
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Table II.11--Projected Total IRL Shipments From the 2015 GSFL-IRL ECS Final Rule
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sector 2017 2018 2019
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Residential..................................................... 27,021 24,654 20,974
Commercial...................................................... 3,746 2,993 2,506
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Issue 32: DOE seeks feedback on how the projected shipments in
Table II.10 and Table II.11 of this RFI compare to actual shipments of
GSFLs and IRLs in these years.
Issue 33: DOE seeks shipment data on GSFLs and IRLs over the last
5-year period, separated by product classes. For each product class of
GSFLs, DOE seeks shipment data by lamp diameter.
Issue 34: DOE requests information on the current and past five
years of shipments of certain ER, BR, and R lamps. DOE also requests
information on expected market trends for these products over the
analysis period.
NEMA periodically releases lamp indices. In a recent lamp index
report, NEMA stated that shipments for T5, T8, and T12 lamps in the
first quarter of 2019 decreased by 12.3 percent, 13.6 percent, and 2.8
percent, respectively compared to the same period the previous year. In
the first quarter of 2019 tubular light-emitting diodes (``TLEDs'')
accounted for 30.4 percent and T5, T8, and T12 fluorescent lamps
accounted for respectively, 8.2 percent, 50.9 percent, and 10.4 percent
of fluorescent lamp shipments.\12\ Comparatively, in the fourth quarter
of 2017, TLEDs accounted for 23.1 percent and T5, T8, and T12
fluorescent lamps accounted for respectively 8.5 percent, 57.1 percent,
and 11.4 percent of the fluorescent lamp shipments.\13\ NEMA's
[[Page 25338]]
data point to a decline in linear fluorescent shipments and an increase
in TLED shipments.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\12\ Linear Fluorescent Lamp Indexes Continue Year-Over-Year
Decline in First Quarter 2019 while T-LED Market Penetration
Increases. See https://www.nema.org/Intelligence/Indices/Pages/Linear-Fluorescent-Lamp-Indexes-Continue-Year-Over-Year-Decline-in-First-Quarter-2019-while-T-LED-Market-Penetration-Increa.aspx.
\13\ Linear Fluorescent Lamp Indexes Continue Year-Over-Year
Decline in Fourth Quarter 2017 while T-LED Market Penetration
Increases. See https://www.nema.org/Intelligence/Indices/Pages/Linear-Fluorescent-Lamp-Indexes-Continue-Year-Over-Year-Decline-in-Fourth-Quarter-2017-while-T-LED-Market-Penetration-Incre.aspx.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Issue 35: DOE seeks feedback on the projected rate of increase/
decline of GSFL and IRL (including certain ER, BR, and R lamps)
shipments in the next five years.
Issue 36: DOE also seeks information on the rate of shift from
linear fluorescents to TLEDs including what types of GSFLs TLEDs are
most frequently replacing (i.e., diameter, length) and in what
scenarios are replacements occurring (i.e., single lamp replacement,
renovation, new construction).
Issue 37: DOE seeks information regarding the potential variables
that could cause consumers to opt to purchase other technologies (such
as TLEDs) instead of GSFLs. DOE specifically seeks input on the
magnitude of the change in efficiency, first cost, payback, or other
variables that could cause consumers to opt for an alternate technology
if energy conservation standards for GSFLs were amended.
Issue 38: DOE also seeks information on shifts within reflector
incandescent/halogen lamps and/or to other lamp technologies.
Linear fluorescent lamps with a CRI greater than or equal 87
(``high CRI fluorescent lamps'') are not subject to standards. Based on
a preliminary review of products on the market, DOE found several high
CRI fluorescent lamps on the market. DOE found that most of these
products are T12 linear fluorescent lamps comprising mainly of the 4-
foot MBP lamp type followed by the 8-foot SP slimline lamp type.
Issue 39: DOE requests information on the portion of the
fluorescent lamp market that comprises of lamps with CRI of 87 or
higher and information on the common shapes, lengths, diameters, and
base types of these lamps. DOE also requests information on the
specific applications for which fluorescent lamps with CRI of 87 or
higher are used.
Additionally, based on its preliminary review of the market, DOE
found several T12 lamps of lengths that are not currently regulated.
Issue 40: DOE requests information on the portion of the
fluorescent lamp market comprised of lamps with T12 diameters and the
common base types and lengths of those lamps. DOE also requests
information on the specific applications for which these T12 lamps are
used.
I. National Impact Analysis
The purpose of the NIA is to estimate the aggregate economic
impacts of potential efficacy standards at the national level. The NIA
assesses the national energy savings (``NES'') and the national NPV of
total consumer costs and savings that would be expected to result from
new or amended standards at specific efficiency levels.
In the 2015 GSFL-IRL ECS final rule, DOE evaluated the impacts of
new and amended standards for GSFLs and IRLs by comparing projections
of total energy consumption with amended energy conservation standards
to projections of energy consumption without the standards (no new
standards). The no-new-standards case projections characterize energy
use and consumer costs for each product class in the absence of new or
amended energy conservation standards. In characterizing the no-new-
standards and standards cases, DOE considered shipments from the
shipments model, the mix of efficiencies sold in the absence of amended
standards and how they may change, the annual energy consumption and
installed cost per unit, and changes in electricity prices. In the
reference case DOE assumed lighting controls penetration grows year-by-
year in the commercial and industrial sector, as driven by an estimated
75 percent compliance rate with building codes (assuming these building
codes remain frozen in time).
DOE reduced the unit energy consumption (UEC) by a fixed 30 percent
for the stock of lighting in which controls based on switching only
were assumed to operate. For controls systems that incorporate dimming,
DOE assumed the energy consumption reductions per those described in
section II.F of this RFI.
Since lamps and ballasts are sold separately, DOE considered a
broad array of lamp-and-ballast pairings that were representative of
what consumer may choose and ensured that the ballast and lamp were
compatible and where possible (without sacrificing energy savings)
provided light output within 10 percent or less of the baseline lamp-
and-ballast system. DOE assumed no rebound effect for lighting. The
rebound effect refers to the tendency of a consumer to respond to the
cost savings associated with more efficient products in a manner that
leads to marginally greater equipment usage, thereby diminishing some
portion of anticipated benefits related to improved efficacy. See
chapter 11 and 12 of the 2015 GSFL-IRL ECS final rule TSD for a
detailed discussion of the NIA.
Issue 41: DOE seeks information on the distribution of lamp
efficacy within each product class and whether that is expected to
change under the currently applicable energy conservation standards.
Issue 42: DOE seeks information regarding the use of lighting
controls at a national level broken down, if possible, by the type of
lighting control (e.g. occupancy sensors, dimmers, etc.).
Issue 43: DOE seeks comments and information on whether a rebound
rate of 0 percent is appropriate.
J. Manufacturer Impact Analysis
The purpose of the manufacturer impact analysis (``MIA'') is to
estimate the financial impact of amended energy conservation standards
on manufacturers of GSFLs and IRLs, and to evaluate the potential
impact of such standards on direct employment and manufacturing
capacity. The MIA includes both quantitative and qualitative aspects.
The quantitative part of the MIA primarily relies on the Government
Regulatory Impact Model (``GRIM''), an industry cash-flow model adapted
for each product in this analysis, with the key output of industry net
present value (``INPV''). The qualitative part of the MIA addresses the
potential impacts of energy conservation standards on manufacturing
capacity and industry competition, as well as factors such as product
characteristics, impacts on particular subgroups of firms, and
important market and product trends.
In the 2015 GSFL-IRL ECS final rule, for the MIA, DOE modeled two
standards case markup scenarios to represent the uncertainty regarding
the potential impacts on prices and profitability for manufacturers
following the implementation of potential amended energy conservation
standards: (1) A flat, or preservation of gross margin, markup scenario
(absolute dollar markup increases as product costs increase with
efficacy) and (2) a preservation of operating profit markup scenario
(maintain the no-new-standards case total operating profit in absolute
dollars in the standards case, despite higher production costs and
investment). In addition, based on manufacturer feedback, for GSFLs,
DOE evaluated a two-tiered markup scenario which assumed higher
efficacy GSFLs command a higher manufacturer markup and baseline
efficacy GSFLs subsequently have a lower manufacturer markup. See
chapter 13 of the GSFL-IRL ECS final rule TSD.
[[Page 25339]]
Issue 44: DOE seeks feedback on the manufacturer markup scenarios
described above, and whether they are valid for use in potential future
analyses.
As part of the MIA, DOE intends to analyze impacts of amended
energy conservation standards on subgroups of manufacturers of covered
products, including small business manufacturers. DOE uses the Small
Business Administration's (``SBA's'') small business size standards to
determine whether manufacturers qualify as small businesses, which are
listed by the applicable North American Industry Classification System
(``NAICS'') code.\14\ Manufacturing of GSFLs and IRLs is classified
under NAICS 335110, ``Electric Lamp Bulb and Part Manufacturing,'' and
the SBA sets a threshold of 1,250 employees or less for a domestic
entity to be considered as a small business. This employee threshold
includes all employees in a business' parent company and any other
subsidiaries.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\14\ Available online at https://www.sba.gov/document/support--table-size-standards.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
One aspect of assessing manufacturer burden involves examining the
cumulative impact of multiple DOE standards and the product-specific
regulatory actions of other Federal agencies that affect the
manufacturers of a covered product. While any one regulation may not
impose a significant burden on manufacturers, the combined effects of
several existing or impending regulations may have serious consequences
for some manufacturers, groups of manufacturers, or an entire industry.
Assessing the impact of a single regulation may overlook this
cumulative regulatory burden. In addition to energy conservation
standards, other regulations can significantly affect manufacturers'
financial operations. Multiple regulations affecting the same
manufacturer can strain profits and lead companies to abandon product
lines or markets with lower expected future returns than competing
products. For these reasons, DOE conducts an analysis of cumulative
regulatory burden as part of its rulemakings pertaining to appliance
efficiency.
Issue 45: To the extent feasible, DOE seeks the names and contact
information of any domestic or foreign-based manufacturers that
distribute GSFLs and IRLs (including certain ER, BR, and R lamps) in
the United States.
Issue 46: DOE identified small businesses as a subgroup of
manufacturers that could be disproportionally impacted by amended
energy conservation standards. DOE requests the names and contact
information of small business manufacturers, as defined by the SBA's
size threshold, of GSFLs and IRLs (including certain ER, BR, and R
lamps) that distribute products in the United States. In addition, DOE
requests comment on any other manufacturer subgroups that could be
disproportionately impacted by amended energy conservation standards.
DOE requests feedback on any potential approaches that could be
considered to address impacts on manufacturers, including small
businesses.
Issue 47: DOE requests information regarding the cumulative
regulatory burden impacts on manufacturers of GSFLs and IRLs (including
certain ER, BR, and R lamps) associated with (1) other DOE standards
applying to different products that these manufacturers may also make
and (2) product-specific regulatory actions of other Federal agencies.
DOE also requests comment on its methodology for computing cumulative
regulatory burden and whether there are any flexibilities it can
consider that would reduce this burden while remaining consistent with
the requirements of EPCA.
III. Other Energy Conservation Standards Topics
A. Market Failures
In the field of economics, a market failure is a situation in which
the market outcome does not maximize societal welfare. Such an outcome
would result in unrealized potential welfare. DOE welcomes comment on
any aspect of market failures, especially those in the context of
amended energy conservation standards for GSFLs and IRLs.
B. Network Mode/``Smart'' Technology
DOE published an RFI on the emerging smart technology appliance and
equipment market. 83 FR 46886 (Sept. 17, 2018). In that RFI, DOE sought
information to better understand market trends and issues in the
emerging market for appliances and commercial equipment that
incorporate smart technology. DOE's intent in issuing the RFI was to
ensure that DOE did not inadvertently impede such innovation in
fulfilling its statutory obligations in setting efficiency standards
for covered products and equipment. DOE seeks comments, data and
information on the issues presented in the RFI as they may be
applicable to energy conservation standards for GSFLs and IRLs.
C. Other Issues
Additionally, DOE welcomes comments on other issues relevant to the
conduct of this rulemaking that may not specifically be identified in
this document. In particular, DOE notes that under Executive Order
13771, ``Reducing Regulation and Controlling Regulatory Costs,''
Executive Branch agencies such as DOE are directed to manage the costs
associated with the imposition of expenditures required to comply with
Federal regulations. See 82 FR 9339 (Feb. 3, 2017). Consistent with
that Executive Order, DOE encourages the public to provide input on
measures DOE could take to lower the cost of its energy conservation
standards rulemakings, recordkeeping and reporting requirements, and
compliance and certification requirements applicable to GSFLs and IRLs
while remaining consistent with the requirements of EPCA.
IV. Submission of Comments
DOE invites all interested parties to submit in writing by the date
specified previously in the DATES section of this document, comments
and information on matters addressed in this document and on other
matters relevant to DOE's consideration of amended energy conservations
standards for GSFLs and IRLs. After the close of the comment period,
DOE will review the public comments received and may begin collecting
data and conducting the analyses discussed in this document.
Submitting comments via http://www.regulations.gov. The http://www.regulations.gov web page requires you to provide your name and
contact information. Your contact information will be viewable to DOE
Building Technologies Office staff only. Your contact information will
not be publicly viewable except for your first and last names,
organization name (if any), and submitter representative name (if any).
If your comment is not processed properly because of technical
difficulties, DOE will use this information to contact you. If DOE
cannot read your comment due to technical difficulties and cannot
contact you for clarification, DOE may not be able to consider your
comment.
However, your contact information will be publicly viewable if you
include it in the comment or in any documents attached to your comment.
Any information that you do not want to be publicly viewable should not
be included in your comment, nor in any document attached to your
comment. Persons viewing comments will see only first and last names,
organization
[[Page 25340]]
names, correspondence containing comments, and any documents submitted
with the comments.
Do not submit to http://www.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 http://www.regulations.gov cannot be claimed as CBI. Comments
received through the website will waive any CBI claims for the
information submitted. For information on submitting CBI, see the
Confidential Business Information section.
DOE processes submissions made through http://www.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
www.regulations.gov provides after you have successfully uploaded your
comment.
Submitting comments via email, hand delivery/courier, or postal
mail. Comments and documents submitted via email, hand delivery/
courier, or postal mail also will be posted to http://www.regulations.gov. If you do not want your personal contact
information to be publicly viewable, do not include it in your comment
or any accompanying documents. Instead, provide your contact
information on a cover letter. Include your first and last names, email
address, telephone number, and optional mailing address. The cover
letter will not be publicly viewable as long as it does not include any
comments.
Include contact information each time you submit comments, data,
documents, and other information to DOE. If you submit via postal mail
or hand delivery/courier, please provide all items on a CD, if
feasible. It is not necessary to submit printed copies. No
telefacsimiles (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, written in English, and 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.
It is DOE's policy that all comments may be included in the public
docket, without change and as received, including any personal
information provided in the comments (except information deemed to be
exempt from public disclosure).
DOE considers public participation to be a very important part of
the process for developing energy conservation standards. DOE actively
encourages the participation and interaction of the public during the
comment period in each stage of the rulemaking process. Interactions
with and between members of the public provide a balanced discussion of
the issues and assist DOE in the rulemaking process. Anyone who wishes
to be added to the DOE mailing list to receive future notices and
information about this process or would like to request a public
meeting should contact Appliance and Equipment Standards Program staff
at (202) 287-1445 or via email at
[email protected].
Signing Authority
This document of the Department of Energy was signed on February
25, 2020, by Alexander N. Fitzsimmons, Deputy Assistant Secretary for
Energy Efficiency, Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, pursuant to
delegated authority from the Secretary of Energy. That document with
the original signature and date is maintained by DOE. For
administrative purposes only, and in compliance with requirements of
the Office of the Federal Register, the undersigned DOE Federal
Register Liaison Officer has been authorized to sign and submit the
document in electronic format for publication, as an official document
of the Department of Energy. This administrative process in no way
alters the legal effect of this document upon publication in the
Federal Register.
Signed in Washington, DC, on April 22, 2020.
Treena V. Garrett,
Federal Register Liaison Officer, U.S. Department of Energy.
[FR Doc. 2020-08851 Filed 4-30-20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6450-01-P