Home/Federal/Federal Register/2022-28072

Proposed Rule2022-28072

Energy Conservation Program: Energy Conservation Standards for General Service Lamps

Primary source

Metadata and text below are from the Federal Register, a public-domain U.S. government work. Always verify the official published version before relying on it for any legal matter.

Published

January 11, 2023

Issuing agencies

Energy Department

Abstract

The Energy Policy and Conservation Act, as amended (EPCA), directs the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) to initiate two rulemaking cycles for general service lamps (GSLs) that, among other requirements, determine whether standards in effect for GSLs should be amended. EPCA also requires DOE to periodically determine whether more-stringent, standards would be technologically feasible and economically justified, and would result in significant energy savings. In this notice of proposed rulemaking (NOPR), DOE proposes amended standards for GSLs pursuant to its statutory authority in EPCA, and also announces a webinar to receive comments on its proposal and associated analyses and results.

Full Text

<html>
<head>
<title>Federal Register, Volume 88 Issue 7 (Wednesday, January 11, 2023)</title>
</head>
<body><pre>
[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 7 (Wednesday, January 11, 2023)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 1638-1719]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [<a href="http://www.gpo.gov">www.gpo.gov</a>]
[FR Doc No: 2022-28072]

[[Page 1637]]

Vol. 88

Wednesday,

No. 7

January 11, 2023

Part II

Department of Energy

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

10 CFR Part 430

Energy Conservation Program: Energy Conservation Standards for General
Service Lamps; Proposed Rule

Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 7 / Wednesday, January 11, 2023 /
Proposed Rules

[[Page 1638]]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

10 CFR Part 430

[EERE-2022-BT-STD-0022]
RIN 1904-AF43

Energy Conservation Program: Energy Conservation Standards for
General Service Lamps

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

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking and announcement of public
meeting.

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

SUMMARY: The Energy Policy and Conservation Act, as amended (EPCA),
directs the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) to initiate two rulemaking
cycles for general service lamps (GSLs) that, among other requirements,
determine whether standards in effect for GSLs should be amended. EPCA
also requires DOE to periodically determine whether more-stringent,
standards would be technologically feasible and economically justified,
and would result in significant energy savings. In this notice of
proposed rulemaking (NOPR), DOE proposes amended standards for GSLs
pursuant to its statutory authority in EPCA, and also announces a
webinar to receive comments on its proposal and associated analyses and
results.

DATES:
Comments: DOE will accept comments, data, and information regarding
this NOPR no later than March 27, 2023.
Comments regarding the likely competitive impact of the proposed
standard should be sent to the Department of Justice contact listed in
the ADDRESSES section on or before February 10, 2023.
Meeting: DOE will hold a public meeting via webinar on Wednesday,
February 1, 2023, from 1 p.m. to 4 p.m. See section IX, ``Public
Participation,'' for webinar registration information, participant
instructions, and information about the capabilities available to
webinar participants.

ADDRESSES: Interested persons are encouraged to submit comments using
the Federal eRulemaking Portal at <a href="http://www.regulations.gov">www.regulations.gov</a>, under docket
number EERE-2022-BT-STD-0022. Follow the instructions for submitting
comments. Alternatively, interested persons may submit comments,
identified by docket number EERE-2022-BT-STD-0022, by any of the
following methods:
Email: <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#4d0a1e017f7d7f7f1e19097d7d7f7f0d282863292228632a223b">[email&#160;protected]</a>. Include the docket number EERE-
2022-BT-STD-0022 in the subject line of the message.
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.
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 telefacsimiles (faxes) will be accepted. For detailed
instructions on submitting comments and additional information on the
rulemaking process, see section IX 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 <a href="http://www.regulations.gov">www.regulations.gov</a>. All documents in the
docket are listed in the <a href="http://www.regulations.gov">www.regulations.gov</a> index. However, not all
documents listed in the index may be publicly available, such as
information that is exempt from public disclosure.
The docket web page can be found at <a href="http://www.regulations.gov/docket/EERE-2022-BT-STD-0022">www.regulations.gov/docket/EERE-2022-BT-STD-0022</a>. The docket web page contains instructions on how
to access all documents, including public comments, in the docket. See
section IX of this document for information on how to submit comments
through <a href="http://www.regulations.gov">www.regulations.gov</a>.
EPCA requires the Attorney General to provide DOE a written
determination of whether the proposed standard is likely to lessen
competition. The U.S. Department of Justice Antitrust Division invites
input from market participants and other interested persons with views
on the likely competitive impact of the proposed standard. Interested
persons may contact the Division at <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#d1b4bfb4a3b6a8ffa2a5b0bfb5b0a3b5a291a4a2b5bebbffb6bea7">[email&#160;protected]</a> on or
before the date specified in the DATES section. Please indicate in the
``Subject'' line of your email the title and Docket Number of this
proposed rule.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Mr. Bryan Berringer, 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) 586-0371. Email: <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#1d5c6d6d71747c737e784e697c73797c6f796e4c68786e697472736e5d787833797278337a726b">[email&#160;protected]</a>.
Ms. Celia Sher, U.S. Department of Energy, Office of the General
Counsel, GC-33, 1000 Independence Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20585-0121.
Telephone: (202) 287-6122. Email: <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#5211373e3b337c013a3720123a237c363d377c353d24">[email&#160;protected]</a>.
For further information on how to submit a comment, review other
public comments and the docket, or participate in the public meeting,
contact the Appliance and Equipment Standards Program staff at (202)
287-1445 or by email: <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#aaebdadac6c3cbc4c9cff9decbc4cecbd8ced9fbdfcfd9dec3c5c4d9eacfcf84cec5cf84cdc5dc">[email&#160;protected]</a>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: DOE proposes to incorporate by reference the
following industry test standard into 10 CFR part 430:
Underwriters Laboratories (UL) 1598C, ``UL 1598C Standard for
Safety Light-Emitting Diode (LED) Retrofit Luminaire Conversion Kits,''
approved January 12, 2017.
Copies of UL 1598C can be obtained by going to <a href="https://www.shopulstandards.com/Default.aspx">https://www.shopulstandards.com/Default.aspx</a>.
For a further discussion of this standard, see section VIII.M of
this document.

Table of Contents

I. Synopsis of the Proposed Rule
A. Benefits and Costs to Consumers
B. Impact on Manufacturers
C. National Benefits and Costs
D. Conclusion
II. Introduction
A. Authority
B. Background
1. History of Standards Rulemaking for General Service Lamps
2. Current Standards
III. General Discussion
A. Product Classes and Scope of Coverage
B. Test Procedure
C. Technological Feasibility
1. General
2. Maximum Technologically Feasible Levels
D. Energy Savings
1. Determination of Savings
2. Significance of Savings
E. Economic Justification
1. Specific Criteria
a. Economic Impact on Manufacturers and Consumers
b. Savings in Operating Costs Compared to Increase in Price (LCC
and PBP)
c. Energy Savings
d. Lessening of Utility or Performance of Products
e. Impact of Any Lessening of Competition
f. Need for National Energy Conservation
g. Other Factors
2. Rebuttable Presumption
IV. Scope of Coverage
A. Definitions of General Service Lamp, Compact Fluorescent
Lamp, General

[[Page 1639]]

Service LED Lamp, General Service OLED Lamp, General Service
Incandescent Lamp
B. Supporting Definitions
C. GSLs Evaluated for Potential Standards in This NOPR
V. Scope of Metrics
1. Lumens per Watt (Lamp Efficacy)
2. Power Factor
3. Lifetime
4. Start Time
5. CRI
6. Summary of Metrics
VI. Methodology and Discussion
A. Market and Technology Assessment
1. Product Classes
a. Lamp Component Location
b. Standby Mode Operation
c. Directionality
d. Lamp Length
e. Product Class Summary
2. Technology Options
B. Screening Analysis
1. Screened-Out Technologies
2. Remaining Technologies
C. Engineering Analysis
1. Efficiency Analysis
2. Representative Product Classes
3. Baseline Lamps
a. Integrated Omnidirectional Short Product Class
b. Integrated Omnidirectional Long Product Class
c. Integrated Directional Product Class
d. Non-Integrated Omnidirectional Short Product Class
e. Non-Integrated Directional Product Class
4. More Efficacious Substitutes
a. Integrated Omnidirectional Short Product Class
b. Integrated Omnidirectional Long Product Class
c. Integrated Directional Product Class
d. Non-Integrated Omnidirectional Short Product Class
e. Non-Integrated Directional Product Class
5. Efficacy Levels
a. Equation Form
b. Integrated Omnidirectional Short Product Classes
c. Integrated Omnidirectional Long Product Class
d. Integrated Directional Product Class
e. Non-Integrated Omnidirectional Short Product Class
f. Non-Integrated Directional Product Class
6. Scaling to Other Product Classes
a. Scaling of Integrated Standby Mode Product Classes
b. Scaling of Non-Integrated Long Product Class
7. Summary of All Efficacy Levels
D. Cost Analysis
E. Energy Use Analysis
1. Operating Hours
a. Residential Sector
b. Commercial Sector
2. Input Power
3. Lighting Controls
F. Life-Cycle Cost and Payback Period Analysis
1. Product Cost
2. Installation Cost
3. Annual Energy Consumption
4. Energy Prices
5. Product Lifetime
6. Residual Value
7. Disposal Cost
8. Discount Rates
a. Residential
b. Commercial
9. Efficacy Distribution in the No-New-Standards Case
10. LCC Savings Calculation
11. Payback Period Analysis
G. Shipments Analysis
1. Shipments Model
a. Lamp Demand Module
b. Price-Learning Module
c. Market-Share Module
H. National Impact Analysis
1. National Energy Savings
a. Smart Lamps
b. Unit Energy Consumption Adjustment To Account for GSL Lumen
Distribution for the Integrated Omnidirectional Short Product Class
c. Unit Energy Consumption Adjustment To Account for Type A
Integrated Omnidirectional Long Lamps
2. Net Present Value Analysis
I. Consumer Subgroup Analysis
J. Manufacturer Impact Analysis
1. Overview
2. Government Regulatory Impact Model and Key Inputs
a. Manufacturer Production Costs
b. Shipments Projections
c. Product and Capital Conversion Costs
d. Markup Scenarios
K. Emissions Analysis
1. Air Quality Regulations Incorporated in DOE's Analysis
L. Monetizing Emissions Impacts
1. Monetization of Greenhouse Gas Emissions
a. Social Cost of Carbon
b. Social Cost of Methane and Nitrous Oxide
2. Monetization of Other Air Pollutants
M. Utility Impact Analysis
N. Employment Impact Analysis
VII. Analytical Results and Conclusions
A. Trial Standard Levels
B. Economic Justification and Energy Savings
1. Economic Impacts on Individual Consumers
a. Life-Cycle Cost and Payback Period
b. Consumer Subgroup Analysis
c. Rebuttable Presumption Payback
2. Economic Impacts on Manufacturers
a. Industry Cash Flow Analysis Results
b. Direct Impacts on Employment
c. Impacts on Manufacturing Capacity
d. Impacts on Subgroups of Manufacturers
e. Cumulative Regulatory Burden
3. National Impact Analysis
a. Significance of Energy Savings
b. Net Present Value of Consumer Costs and Benefits
c. Indirect Impacts on Employment
4. Impact on Utility or Performance of Products
5. Impact of Any Lessening of Competition
6. Need of the Nation To Conserve Energy
7. Other Factors
8. Summary of Economic Impacts
C. Conclusion
1. Benefits and Burdens of TSLs Considered for GSLs Standards
2. Annualized Benefits and Costs of the Proposed Standards
D. Reporting, Certification, and Sampling Plan
VIII. Procedural Issues and Regulatory Review
A. Review Under Executive Orders 12866 and 13563
B. Review Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act
1. Description on Estimated Number of Small Entities Regulated
2. Description and Estimate of Compliance Requirements Including
Differences in Cost, if Any, for Different Groups of Small Entities
3. Duplication, Overlap, and Conflict With Other Rules and
Regulations
4. Significant Alternatives to the Rule
C. Review Under the Paperwork Reduction Act
D. Review Under the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969
E. Review Under Executive Order 13132
F. Review Under Executive Order 12988
G. Review Under the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995
H. Review Under the Treasury and General Government
Appropriations Act, 1999
I. Review Under Executive Order 12630
J. Review Under the Treasury and General Government
Appropriations Act, 2001
K. Review Under Executive Order 13211
L. Information Quality
M. Description of Materials Incorporated by Reference
IX. Public Participation
A. Participation in the Webinar
B. Procedure for Submitting Prepared General Statements for
Distribution
C. Conduct of the Webinar
D. Submission of Comments
E. Issues on Which DOE Seeks Comment
X. Approval of the Office of the Secretary

I. Synopsis of the Proposed Rule

Title III, Part B \1\ of the EPCA,\2\ established the Energy
Conservation Program for Consumer Products Other Than Automobiles. (42
U.S.C. 6291-6309) These products include GSLs, the subject of this
proposed rulemaking.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\1\ For editorial reasons, upon codification in the U.S. Code,
part B was redesignated part A. All references to part B in this
document refer to the redesignated part A.
\2\ All references to EPCA in this document refer to the statute
as amended through the Energy Act of 2020, Public Law 116-260 (Dec.
27, 2020), which reflect the last statutory amendments that impact
parts A and A-1 of EPCA.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

DOE is issuing this NOPR pursuant to multiple provisions in EPCA.
First, EPCA requires that DOE must initiate a second rulemaking cycle
by January 1, 2020, to determine whether standards in effect for
general service incandescent lamps (GSILs) should be amended with more
stringent energy conservation standards and if the exemptions for
certain incandescent lamps should be maintained or discontinued. For
this second review of energy conservation standards, the scope of
rulemaking is not limited to incandescent technologies. (42 U.S.C.
6295(i)(6)(B)(ii))

[[Page 1640]]

Second, EPCA also provides that not later than 6 years after
issuance of any final rule establishing or amending a standard, DOE
must publish either a notice of determination that standards for the
product do not need to be amended, or a notice of proposed rulemaking
including new proposed energy conservation standards (proceeding to a
final rule, as appropriate). (42 U.S.C. 6295(m)) Third, pursuant to
EPCA, any new or amended energy conservation standard must be designed
to achieve the maximum improvement in energy efficiency that DOE
determines is technologically feasible and economically justified. (42
U.S.C. 6295(o)(2)(A)) Furthermore, the new or amended standard must
result in a significant conservation of energy. (42 U.S.C.
6295(o)(3)(B)) Lastly, when DOE proposes to adopt an amended standard
for a type or class of covered product, it must determine the maximum
improvement in energy efficiency or maximum reduction in energy use
that is technologically feasible for such product. (42 U.S.C.
6295(p)(1))
In accordance with these and other statutory provisions discussed
in this document, DOE proposes energy conservation standards for GSLs.
This is the second rulemaking cycle for GSLs. As a result of the first
rulemaking cycle, there is currently a sales prohibition on the sale of
any GSLs that do not meet a minimum efficacy standard of 45 lumens per
watt. There are existing DOE energy conservation standards higher than
45 lumens per watt for medium base compact fluorescent lamps (MBCFLs),
which are types of GSLs. 70 FR 60407 (Oct. 18, 2005). The standards
proposed in this rulemaking, which are expressed in minimum lumens (lm)
output per watt (W) of a lamp or lamp efficacy (lm/W), are shown in
Table I.1. These proposed standards, if adopted, would apply to all
GSLs listed in Table I.1 manufactured in, or imported into, the United
States beginning on the effective date for the standard.
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP11JA23.000

A. Impact on Manufacturers

The industry net present value (INPV) is the sum of the discounted
cash flows to the industry from the base year through the end of the
analysis period (2022-2058). Using a real discount rate of 6.1 percent,
DOE estimates that the INPV for manufacturers of GSLs in the case
without new and amended standards is $2,014 million in 2021$. Under the
proposed new and amended standards, the change in INPV is estimated to
range from -13.5 percent to -7.2 percent, which is approximately -$271
million to -$145 million. In order to bring products into compliance
with new and amended standards, it is estimated that the industry would
incur total conversion costs of $407 million.
DOE's analysis of the impacts of the proposed standards on
manufacturers is described in section VI.J of this document. The
analytic results of the manufacturer impact analysis (MIA) are
presented in section VII.B.2 of this document.

B. Benefits and Costs to Consumers

Table I.2 presents DOE's evaluation of the economic impacts of the
proposed standards on consumers of GSLs, as measured by the average
life-cycle cost (LCC) savings and the simple payback period (PBP).\3\
The average LCC savings

[[Page 1641]]

are positive for all product classes, and the PBP is less than the
average lifetime of GSLs, which varies by product class and efficiency
level (see section VI.F.5 of this document).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\3\ The average LCC savings refer to consumers that are affected
by a standard and are measured relative to the efficiency
distribution in the no-new-standards case, which depicts the market
in the first full year of compliance in the absence of new or
amended standards (see section VI.F.11 of this document). The simple
PBP, which is designed to compare specific efficiency levels, is
measured relative to the baseline product (see section VI.F.13 of
this document).

Table I.2--Impacts of Proposed Energy Conservation Standards on
Consumers of GSLs
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Average LCC
Product class savings Simple payback
(2021$) period (years)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Residential:
Integrated Omnidirectional Short.... 0.59 0.8
Integrated Omnidirectional Long..... 1.82 5.4
Integrated Directional.............. 3.01 0.0
Non-integrated Omnidirectional *.... .............. ..............
Non-integrated Directional.......... 0.28 4.2
Commercial:
Integrated Omnidirectional Short.... 1.11 0.5
Integrated Omnidirectional Long..... 4.74 2.9
Integrated Directional.............. 3.86 0.0
Non-integrated Omnidirectional...... 6.62 2.1
Non-integrated Directional.......... 0.69 2.8
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Non-integrated Omnidirectional GSLs were only analyzed for the
commercial sector.

DOE's analysis of the impacts of the proposed standards on
consumers is described in section VII.B.1 of this document.

C. National Benefits and Costs 4
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\4\ All monetary values in this document are expressed in 2021
dollars.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

DOE's analyses indicate that the proposed energy conservation
standards for GSLs would save a significant amount of energy. Relative
to the case without new or amended standards, the lifetime energy
savings for GSLs purchased in the 30-year period that begins in the
anticipated first full year of compliance with the amended standards
(2029-2058) amount to 4.0 quadrillion British thermal units (Btu), or
quads.\5\ This represents a savings of 48 percent relative to the
energy use of these products in the case without amended standards
(referred to as the ``no-new-standards case'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\5\ The quantity refers to full-fuel-cycle (FFC) energy savings.
FFC energy savings includes the energy consumed in extracting,
processing, and transporting primary fuels (i.e., coal, natural gas,
petroleum fuels), and, thus, presents a more complete picture of the
impacts of energy efficiency standards. For more information on the
FFC metric, see section VI.H.1 of this document.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

The cumulative net present value (NPV) of total consumer benefits
of the proposed standards for GSLs ranges from $7.29 billion (at a 7-
percent discount rate) to $20.37 billion (at a 3-percent discount
rate). This NPV expresses the estimated total value of future
operating-cost savings minus the estimated increased product costs for
GSLs purchased in 2029-2058.
In addition, the proposed standards for GSLs are projected to yield
significant environmental benefits. DOE estimates that the proposed
standards would result in cumulative emission reductions (over the same
period as for energy savings) of 130.63 million metric tons (Mt) \6\ of
carbon dioxide (CO<INF>2</INF>), 59.27 thousand tons of sulfur dioxide
(SO<INF>2</INF>), 203.05 thousand tons of nitrogen oxides
(NO<INF>X</INF>), 902.76 thousand tons of methane (CH<INF>4</INF>),
1.36 thousand tons of nitrous oxide (N<INF>2</INF>O), and 0.39 tons of
mercury (Hg).\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\6\ A metric ton is equivalent to 1.1 short tons. Results for
emissions other than CO<INF>2</INF> are presented in short tons.
\7\ DOE calculated emissions reductions relative to the no-new-
standards case, which reflects key assumptions in the Annual Energy
Outlook 2022 (AEO2022). AEO2022 represents current federal and state
legislation and final implementation of regulations as of the time
of its preparation. See section VI.K of this document for further
discussion of AEO2022 assumptions that effect air pollutant
emissions.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

DOE estimates the value of climate benefits from a reduction in
greenhouse gases (GHG) using four different estimates of the social
cost of CO<INF>2</INF> (SC-CO<INF>2</INF>), the social cost of methane
(SC-CH<INF>4</INF>), and the social cost of nitrous oxide (SC-
N<INF>2</INF>O). Together these represent the social cost of GHG (SC-
GHG). DOE used interim SC-GHG values developed by an Interagency
Working Group on the Social Cost of Greenhouse Gases (IWG).\8\ The
derivation of these values is discussed in section VI.L of this
document. For presentational purposes, the climate benefits associated
with the average SC-GHG at a 3-percent discount rate are estimated to
be $5.9 billion. DOE does not have a single central SC-GHG point
estimate and it emphasizes the importance and value of considering the
benefits calculated using all four SC-GHG estimates.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\8\ See Interagency Working Group on Social Cost of Greenhouse
Gases, Technical Support Document: Social Cost of Carbon, Methane,
and Nitrous Oxide. Interim Estimates Under Executive Order 13990,
Washington, DC, February 2021. <a href="https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/uploads/2021/02/TechnicalSupportDocument_SocialCostofCarbonMethaneNitrousOxide.pdf">https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/uploads/2021/02/TechnicalSupportDocument_SocialCostofCarbonMethaneNitrousOxide.pdf</a>.
\9\ On March 16, 2022, the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals (No.
22-30087) granted the federal government's emergency motion for stay
pending appeal of the February 11, 2022, preliminary injunction
issued in Louisiana v. Biden, No. 21-cv-1074-JDC-KK (W.D. La.). As a
result of the Fifth Circuit's order, the preliminary injunction is
no longer in effect, pending resolution of the federal government's
appeal of that injunction or a further court order. Among other
things, the preliminary injunction enjoined the defendants in that
case from ``adopting, employing, treating as binding, or relying
upon'' the interim estimates of the social cost of greenhouse
gases--which were issued by the Interagency Working Group on the
Social Cost of Greenhouse Gases on February 26, 2021--to monetize
the benefits of reducing greenhouse gas emissions. As reflected in
this proposed rule, DOE has reverted to its approach prior to the
injunction and presents monetized greenhouse gas abatement benefits
where appropriate and permissible under law.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

DOE estimated the monetary health benefits of SO<INF>2</INF> and
NO<INF>X</INF> emissions reductions, also discussed in section VI.L of
this document. DOE estimated the present value of the health benefits
would be $3.6 billion using a 7-percent discount rate, and $10.1
billion using a 3-percent discount rate.\10\ DOE is currently only
monetizing (for SO<INF>2</INF> and NO<INF>X</INF>) particulate matter
(PM)<INF>2.5</INF> precursor health benefits and (for NO<INF>X</INF>)
ozone precursor health benefits, but will

[[Page 1642]]

continue to assess the ability to monetize other effects such as health
benefits from reductions in direct PM<INF>2.5</INF> emissions.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\10\ DOE estimates the economic value of these emissions
reductions resulting from the considered TSLs for the purpose of
complying with the requirements of Executive Order 12866.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Table I.3 summarizes the economic benefits and costs expected to
result from the proposed standards for GSLs. There are other important
unquantified effects, including certain unquantified climate benefits,
unquantified public health benefits from the reduction of toxic air
pollutants and other emissions, unquantified energy security benefits,
and distributional effects, among others.

Table I.3--Summary of Economic Benefits and Costs of Proposed Energy
Conservation Standards for GSLs (TSL 6)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Billion 2021$
------------------------------------------------------------------------
3% discount rate
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Consumer Operating Cost Savings......................... 25.0
Climate Benefits *...................................... 5.9
Health Benefits **...................................... 10.1
---------------
Total Benefits [dagger]............................. 41.0
Consumer Incremental Product Costs [Dagger]............. 4.6
---------------
Net Benefits........................................ 36.4
------------------------------------------------------------------------
7% discount rate
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Consumer Operating Cost Savings......................... 9.7
Climate Benefits * (3% discount rate)................... 5.9
Health Benefits **...................................... 3.6
---------------
Total Benefits [dagger]............................. 19.1
Consumer Incremental Product Costs [Dagger]............. 2.4
---------------
Net Benefits........................................ 16.7
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Note: This table presents the costs and benefits associated with GSLs
shipped in 2029-2058. These results include benefits to consumers
which accrue after 2058 from the products shipped in 2029-2058.
* Climate benefits are calculated using four different estimates of the
social cost of carbon (SC-CO2), methane (SC-CH4), and nitrous oxide
(SC-N2O) (model average at 2.5 percent, 3 percent, and 5 percent
discount rates; 95th percentile at 3 percent discount rate) (see
section VI.L of this rulemaking). Together these represent the global
SC-GHG. For presentational purposes of this table, the climate
benefits associated with the average SC-GHG at a 3 percent discount
rate are shown, but DOE does not have a single central SC-GHG point
estimate. On March 16, 2022, the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals (No.
22-30087) granted the federal government's emergency motion for stay
pending appeal of the February 11, 2022, preliminary injunction issued
in Louisiana v. Biden, No. 21-cv-1074-JDC-KK (W.D. La.). As a result
of the Fifth Circuit's order, the preliminary injunction is no longer
in effect, pending resolution of the federal government's appeal of
that injunction or a further court order. Among other things, the
preliminary injunction enjoined the defendants in that case from
``adopting, employing, treating as binding, or relying upon'' the
interim estimates of the social cost of greenhouse gases--which were
issued by the Interagency Working Group on the Social Cost of
Greenhouse Gases on February 26, 2021--to monetize the benefits of
reducing greenhouse gas emissions. As reflected in this proposed rule,
DOE has reverted to its approach prior to the injunction and presents
monetized greenhouse gas abatement benefits where appropriate and
permissible under law.
** Health benefits are calculated using benefit-per-ton values for NOX
and SO2. DOE is currently only monetizing (for NOX and SO2) PM2.5
precursor health benefits and (for NOX) ozone precursor health
benefits, but will continue to assess the ability to monetize other
effects such as health benefits from reductions in direct PM2.5
emissions. See section VI.L of this document for more details.
[dagger] Total benefits for both the 3-percent and 7-percent cases are
presented using the average SC-GHG with 3-percent discount rate, but
the Department does not have a single central SC-GHG point estimate.
DOE emphasizes the importance and value of considering the benefits
calculated using all four SC-GHG estimates. See Table VII.27 for net
benefits using all four SC-GHG estimates.
[dagger] Costs include incremental equipment costs as well as
installation costs.

The benefits and costs of the proposed standards can also be
expressed in terms of annualized values. The monetary values for the
total annualized net benefits are (1) the reduced consumer operating
costs, minus (2) the increase in product purchase prices and
installation costs, plus (3) the value of climate and health benefits
of emission reduction, all annualized.\11\ The national operating
savings are domestic private U.S. consumer monetary savings that occur
as a result of purchasing the covered products and are measured for the
lifetime of GSLs shipped in 2029-2058. The benefits associated with
reduced emissions achieved as a result of the proposed standards are
also calculated based on the lifetime of GSLs shipped in 2029-2058.
Total benefits for both the 3-percent and 7-percent cases are presented
using the average social costs with 3-percent discount rate. Estimates
of SC-GHG values are presented for all four discount rates in section
VII.B.8 of this document. Table I.4 presents the total estimated
monetized benefits and costs associated with the proposed standard,
expressed in terms of annualized values.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\11\ To convert the time-series of costs and benefits into
annualized values, DOE calculated a present value in 2022, the year
used for discounting the NPV of total consumer costs and savings.
For the benefits, DOE calculated a present value associated with
each year's shipments in the year in which the shipments occur
(e.g.,2030), and then discounted the present value from each year to
2022. Using the present value, DOE then calculated the fixed annual
payment over a 30-year period, starting in the compliance year, that
yields the same present value.

[[Page 1643]]

Table I.4--Annualized Benefits and Costs of Proposed Energy Conservation Standards for GSLs (TSL 6)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Million 2021$/year
-----------------------------------------------------------
Low-net-benefits High-net-benefits
Primary estimate estimate estimate
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
3% discount rate
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Consumer Operating Cost Savings..................... 1,521.4 1,469.8 1,586.0
Climate Benefits *.................................. 358.1 357.7 358.5
Health Benefits **.................................. 615.6 615.0 616.3
-----------------------------------------------------------
Total Benefits [dagger]......................... 2,495.1 2,442.5 2,560.8
Consumer Incremental Product Costs [Dagger]......... 280.3 291.0 270.0
-----------------------------------------------------------
Net Benefits.................................... 2,214.8 2,151.6 2,290.7
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
7% discount rate
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Consumer Operating Cost Savings..................... 1,171.5 1,135.9 1,215.2
Climate Benefits * (3% discount rate)............... 358.1 357.7 358.5
Health Benefits **.................................. 432.0 431.7 432.4
-----------------------------------------------------------
Total Benefits [dagger]......................... 1,961.6 1,925.3 2,006.1
Consumer Incremental Product Costs [Dagger]......... 289.4 299.4 279.8
-----------------------------------------------------------
Net Benefits.................................... 1,672.2 1,625.9 1,726.3
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Note: This table presents the costs and benefits associated with GSLs shipped in 2029-2058. These results
include benefits to consumers which accrue after 2058 from the products shipped in 2029-2058. The Primary, Low
Net Benefits, and High Net Benefits Estimates utilize projections of energy prices from the AEO2022 Reference
case, Low Economic Growth case, and High Economic Growth case, respectively. In addition, LED lamp prices
reflect a higher price learning rate in the Low Net Benefits Estimate, and a lower price learning rate in the
High Net Benefits Estimate. See section VII.B.3.b for discussion. The methods used to derive projected price
trends are explained in section VI.G.1.b of this document. Note that the Benefits and Costs may not sum to the
Net Benefits due to rounding.
* Climate benefits are calculated using four different estimates of the global SC-GHG (see section VI.L of this
rulemaking). For presentational purposes of this table, the climate benefits associated with the average SC-
GHG at a 3 percent discount rate are shown, but the Department does not have a single central SC-GHG point
estimate, and it emphasizes the importance and value of considering the benefits calculated using all four SC-
GHG estimates. On March 16, 2022, the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals (No. 22-30087) granted the federal
government's emergency motion for stay pending appeal of the February 11, 2022, preliminary injunction issued
in Louisiana v. Biden, No. 21-cv-1074-JDC-KK (W.D. La.). As a result of the Fifth Circuit's order, the
preliminary injunction is no longer in effect, pending resolution of the federal government's appeal of that
injunction or a further court order. Among other things, the preliminary injunction enjoined the defendants in
that case from ``adopting, employing, treating as binding, or relying upon'' the interim estimates of the
social cost of greenhouse gases--which were issued by the Interagency Working Group on the Social Cost of
Greenhouse Gases on February 26, 2021--to monetize the benefits of reducing greenhouse gas emissions. As
reflected in this proposed rule, DOE has reverted to its approach prior to the injunction and presents
monetized greenhouse gas abatement benefits where appropriate and permissible under law.
** Health benefits are calculated using benefit-per-ton values for NOX and SO2. DOE is currently only monetizing
(for SO2 and NOX) PM2.5 precursor health benefits and (for NOX) ozone precursor health benefits, but will
continue to assess the ability to monetize other effects such as health benefits from reductions in direct
PM2.5 emissions. See section VI.L of this document for more details.
[dagger] Total benefits for both the 3-percent and 7-percent cases are presented using the average SC-GHG with 3-
percent discount rate, but the Department does not have a single central SC-GHG point estimate.
[Dagger] Costs include incremental equipment costs as well as installation costs

DOE's analysis of the national impacts of the proposed standards is
described in sections VI.H of this document.

D. Conclusion

DOE has tentatively concluded that the proposed standards represent
the maximum improvement in energy efficiency that is technologically
feasible and economically justified, and would result in the
significant conservation of energy. With regards to technological
feasibility, products achieving these standard levels are already
commercially available for all product classes covered by this
proposal. As for economic justification, DOE's analysis shows that the
benefits of the proposed standard exceed, to a great extent, the
burdens of the proposed standards. Using a 7-percent discount rate for
consumer benefits and costs and NO<INF>X</INF> and SO<INF>2</INF>
reduction benefits, and a 3-percent discount rate case for GHG social
costs, the estimated cost of the proposed standards for GSLs is $289.4
million per year in increased product costs, while the estimated annual
benefits are $1.17 billion in reduced product operating costs, $358.1
million in climate benefits, and $432.0 million in health benefits. The
net benefit amounts to $1.67 billion per year.
The significance of energy savings offered by a new or amended
energy conservation standard cannot be determined without knowledge of
the specific circumstances surrounding a given rulemaking.\12\ For
example, some covered products and equipment have most of their energy
consumption occur during periods of peak energy demand. The impacts of
these products on the energy infrastructure can be more pronounced than
products with relatively constant demand. Accordingly, DOE evaluates
the significance of energy savings on a case-by-case basis.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\12\ Procedures, Interpretations, and Policies for Consideration
in New or Revised Energy Conservation Standards and Test Procedures
for Consumer Products and Commercial/Industrial Equipment, 86 FR
70892, 70901 (Dec. 13, 2021).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

As previously mentioned, the standards are projected to result in
estimated national FFC energy savings of 4.0 quads, the equivalent of
the primary annual energy use of 43.0 million homes. In addition, they
are projected to reduce CO<INF>2</INF> emissions by 130.63 Mt. Based on
these findings, DOE has initially determined the energy savings from
the proposed standard levels are ``significant'' within the meaning of
42 U.S.C. 6295(o)(3)(B). A

[[Page 1644]]

more detailed discussion of the basis for these tentative conclusions
is contained in the remainder of this document and the accompanying
TSD.
DOE also considered less-stringent energy efficiency levels as
potential standards, and is still considering them in this rulemaking.
However, DOE has tentatively concluded that TSL 6 achieves the maximum
improvement in energy efficiency that is technologically feasible and
economically justified.
Based on consideration of the public comments DOE receives in
response to this document and related information collected and
analyzed during the course of this rulemaking effort, DOE may adopt
energy efficiency levels presented in this document that are lower than
the proposed standards, or some combination of level(s) that
incorporate the proposed standards in part.

II. Introduction

The following section briefly discusses the statutory authority
underlying this proposed rule, as well as some of the relevant
historical background related to the establishment of standards for
GSLs.

A. Authority

EPCA authorizes DOE to regulate the energy efficiency of a number
of consumer products and certain industrial equipment. Title III, Part
B of EPCA established the Energy Conservation Program for Consumer
Products Other Than Automobiles. These products include GSLs, the
subject of this document. 42 U.S.C. 6295(i)(6))
EPCA directs DOE to conduct two rulemaking cycles to evaluate
energy conservation standards for GSLs. (42 U.S.C. 6295(i)(6)(A)-(B))
For the first rulemaking cycle, EPCA directed DOE to initiate a
rulemaking process prior to January 1, 2014, to determine whether: (1)
to amend energy conservation standards for GSLs and (2) the exemptions
for certain incandescent lamps should be maintained or discontinued.
(42 U.S.C. 6295(i)(6)(A)(i)) The rulemaking was not to be limited to
incandescent lamp technologies and was required to include a
consideration of a minimum standard of 45 lm/W for GSLs. (42 U.S.C.
6295(i)(6)(A)(ii)) EPCA provides that if the Secretary determined that
the standards in effect for GSILs should be amended, a final rule must
be published by January 1, 2017, with a compliance date at least 3
years after the date on which the final rule is published. (42 U.S.C.
6295(i)(6)(A)(iii)) The Secretary was also required to consider phased-
in effective dates after considering certain manufacturer and retailer
impacts. (42 U.S.C. 6295(i)(6)(A)(iv)) If DOE failed to complete a
rulemaking in accordance with 42 U.S.C. 6295(i)(6)(A)(i)-(iv), or if a
final rule from the first rulemaking cycle did not produce savings
greater than or equal to the savings from a minimum efficacy standard
of 45 lm/W, the statute provides a ``backstop'' under which DOE was
required to prohibit sales of GSLs that do not meet a minimum 45 lm/W
standard. (42 U.S.C. 6295(i)(6)(A)(v)). As a result of DOE's failure to
complete a rulemaking in accordance with the statutory criteria, DOE
codified this backstop requirement in a rule issued on May 9, 2022. 87
FR 27439 (May 2022 Backstop Final Rule)
EPCA further directs DOE to initiate a second rulemaking cycle by
January 1, 2020, to determine whether standards in effect for GSILs
(which are a subset of GSLs)) should be amended with more stringent
maximum wattage requirements than EPCA specifies, and whether the
exemptions for certain incandescent lamps should be maintained or
discontinued. (42 U.S.C. 6295(i)(6)(B)(i)) As in the first rulemaking
cycle, the scope of the second rulemaking is not limited to
incandescent lamp technologies. (42 U.S.C. 6295(i)(6)(B)(ii)) As
previously stated in Section I of this document, DOE is publishing this
NOPR pursuant to this second cycle of rulemaking, as well as section
(m) of 42 U.S.C. 6295.
The energy conservation program under EPCA consists essentially of
four parts: (1) testing, (2) labeling, (3) the establishment of 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))
Subject to certain criteria and conditions, DOE is required to
develop test procedures to measure the energy efficiency, energy use,
or estimated annual operating cost of each covered product. (42 U.S.C.
6295(o)(3)(A) and (r)) Manufacturers of covered products must use the
prescribed DOE test procedure as the basis for certifying to DOE that
their products comply with the applicable energy conservation standards
adopted under EPCA and when making representations to the public
regarding the energy use or efficiency of those products. (42 U.S.C.
6293(c) and 42 U.S.C. 6295(s)) Similarly, DOE must use these test
procedures to determine whether the products comply with standards
adopted pursuant to EPCA. (42 U.S.C. 6295(s)) The DOE test procedures
for GSLs appear at title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR)
part 430, subpart B, appendices R, W, BB, and DD.
DOE must follow specific statutory criteria for prescribing new or
amended standards for covered products, including GSLs. Any new or
amended standard for a covered product must be designed to achieve the
maximum improvement in energy efficiency that the Secretary of Energy
determines is technologically feasible and economically justified. (42
U.S.C. 6295(o)(2)(A) and 42 U.S.C. 6295(o)(3)(B)) Furthermore, DOE may
not adopt any standard that would not result in the significant
conservation of energy. (42 U.S.C. 6295(o)(3))
Moreover, DOE may not prescribe a standard: (1) for certain
products, including GSLs, if no test procedure has been established for
the product, or (2) if DOE determines by rule that the standard is not
technologically feasible or economically justified. (42 U.S.C.
6295(o)(3)(A)-(B)) In deciding whether a proposed standard is
economically justified, DOE must determine whether the benefits of the
standard exceed its burdens. (42 U.S.C. 6295(o)(2)(B)(i)) DOE must make
this determination after receiving comments on the proposed standard,
and by considering, to the greatest extent practicable, the following
seven statutory factors:

(1) The economic impact of the standard on manufacturers and
consumers of the products subject to the standard;
(2) The savings in operating costs throughout the estimated
average life of the covered products in the type (or class) compared
to any increase in the price, initial charges, or maintenance
expenses for the covered products that are likely to result from the
standard;
(3) The total projected amount of energy (or as applicable,
water) savings likely to result directly from the standard;
(4) Any lessening of the utility or the performance of the
covered products likely to result from the standard;

[[Page 1645]]

(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))

Further, EPCA establishes a rebuttable presumption that a standard
is economically justified if the Secretary finds that the additional
cost to the consumer of purchasing a product complying with an energy
conservation standard level will be less than three times the value of
the energy savings during the first year that the consumer will receive
as a result of the standard, as calculated under the applicable test
procedure. (42 U.S.C. 6295(o)(2)(B)(iii))
EPCA also contains what is known as an ``anti-backsliding''
provision, which prevents the Secretary from prescribing any amended
standard that either increases the maximum allowable energy use or
decreases the minimum required energy efficiency of a covered product.
(42 U.S.C. 6295(o)(1)) Also, the Secretary may not prescribe an amended
or new standard if interested persons have established by a
preponderance of the evidence that the standard is likely to result in
the unavailability in the United States in any covered product type (or
class) of performance characteristics (including reliability),
features, sizes, capacities, and volumes that are substantially the
same as those generally available in the United States. (42 U.S.C.
6295(o)(4))
Additionally, EPCA specifies requirements when promulgating an
energy conservation standard for a covered product that has two or more
subcategories. DOE must specify a different standard level for a type
or class of product that has the same function or intended use, if DOE
determines that products within such group: (A) consume a different
kind of energy from that consumed by other covered products within such
type (or class); or (B) have a capacity or other performance-related
feature which other products within such type (or class) do not have
and such feature justifies a higher or lower standard. (42 U.S.C.
6295(q)(1)) In determining whether a performance-related feature
justifies a different standard for a group of products, DOE must
consider such factors as the utility to the consumer of the feature and
other factors DOE deems appropriate. Id. Any rule prescribing such a
standard must include an explanation of the basis on which such higher
or lower level was established. (42 U.S.C. 6295(q)(2))
Finally, pursuant to the amendments contained in the Energy
Independence and Security Act of 2007 (EISA), Public Law 110-140, any
final rule for new or amended energy conservation standards promulgated
after July 1, 2010, is required to address standby mode and off mode
energy use. (42 U.S.C. 6295(gg)(3)) Specifically, when DOE adopts a
standard for a covered product after that date, it must, if justified
by the criteria for adoption of standards under EPCA (42 U.S.C.
6295(o)), incorporate standby mode and off mode energy use into a
single standard, or, if that is not feasible, adopt a separate standard
for such energy use for that product. (42 U.S.C. 6295(gg)(3)(A)-(B))
DOE determined that it is not feasible for GSLs included in the scope
of this rulemaking to meet the off-mode criteria because there is no
condition in which a GSL connected to main power is not already in a
mode accounted for in either active or standby mode. DOE notes the
existence of commercially available GSLs that operate in standby mode.
DOE's current test procedures for GSLs address standby mode and off
mode energy use. In this rulemaking, DOE intends to incorporate such
energy use into any amended energy conservation standards that it may
adopt.

B. Background

1. History of Standards Rulemaking for General Service Lamps
Pursuant to its statutory authority to complete the first cycle of
rulemaking for GSLs, DOE published a notice of proposed rulemaking
(NOPR) on March 17, 2016, that addressed the first question that
Congress directed it to consider--whether to amend energy conservation
standards for GSLs (March 2016 NOPR). 81 FR 14528, 14629-14630 (Mar.
17, 2016). In the March 2016 NOPR, DOE stated that it would be unable
to undertake any analysis regarding GSILs and other incandescent lamps
because of a then-applicable congressional restriction (the
Appropriations Rider). See 81 FR 14528, 14540-14541. The Appropriations
Rider prohibited expenditure of funds appropriated by that law to
implement or enforce: (1) 10 CFR 430.32(x), which includes maximum
wattage and minimum rated lifetime requirements for GSILs; and (2)
standards set forth in section 325(i)(1)(B) of EPCA (42 U.S.C.
6295(i)(1)(B)), which sets minimum lamp efficiency ratings for
incandescent reflector lamps (IRLs). Under the Appropriations Rider,
DOE was restricted from undertaking the analysis required to address
the first question presented by Congress, but was not so limited in
addressing the second question--that is, DOE was not prevented from
determining whether the exemptions for certain incandescent lamps
should be maintained or discontinued. To address that second question,
DOE published a Notice of Proposed Definition and Data Availability
(NOPDDA), which proposed to amend the definitions of GSIL, GSL, and
related terms (October 2016 NOPDDA). 81 FR 71794, 71815 (Oct. 18,
2016). The Appropriations Rider, which was originally adopted in 2011
and readopted and extended continuously in multiple subsequent
legislative actions, expired on May 5, 2017, when the Consolidated
Appropriations Act, 2017 was enacted.\13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\13\ See Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2017 (Pub. L. 115-
31, div. D, tit. III); see also Consolidated Appropriations Act,
2018 (Pub. L. 115-141).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

On January 19, 2017, DOE published two final rules concerning the
definitions of GSL, GSIL, and related terms (January 2017 Definition
Final Rules). 82 FR 7276; 82 FR 7322. The January 2017 Definition Final
Rules amended the definitions of GSIL and GSL by bringing certain
categories of lamps that had been excluded by statute from the
definition of GSIL within the definitions of GSIL and GSL. DOE
determined to use two final rules in 2017 to amend the definitions of
GSIL and GSLs in order to address the majority of the definition
changes in one final rule and the exemption for IRLs in the second
final rule. These two rules were issued simultaneously, with the first
rule eschewing a determination regarding the existing exemption for
IRLs in the definition of GSL and the second rulemaking discontinuing
that exemption from the GSL definition. 82 FR 7276, 7312; 82 FR 7322,
7323. As in the October 2016 NOPDDA, DOE stated that the January 2017
Definition Final Rules related only to the second question that
Congress directed DOE to consider, regarding whether to maintain or
discontinue ``exemptions'' for certain incandescent lamps. 82 FR 7276,
7277; 82 FR 7322, 7324 (See also 42 U.S.C. 6295(i)(6)(A)(i)(II)). That
is, neither of the two final rules issued on January 19, 2017,
established energy conservation standards applicable to GSLs. DOE
explained that the Appropriations Rider prevented it from establishing,
or even analyzing, standards for GSILs. 82 FR 7276, 7278. Instead, DOE
explained that it would either impose standards for GSLs in the future
pursuant to its authority to develop GSL standards, or

[[Page 1646]]

apply the backstop standard prohibiting the sale of lamps not meeting a
45 lm/W efficacy standard. 82 FR 7276, 7277-7278. The two final rules
were to become effective as of January 1, 2020.
On March 17, 2017, the National Electrical Manufacturer's
Association (NEMA) filed a petition for review of the January 2017
Definition Final Rules in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth
Circuit. National Electrical Manufacturers Association v. United States
Department of Energy, No. 17-1341. NEMA claimed that DOE ``amend[ed]
the statutory definition of `general service lamp' to include lamps
that Congress expressly stated were `not include[d]' in the
definition'' and adopted an ``unreasonable and unlawful interpretation
of the statutory definition.'' Pet. 2. Prior to merits briefing, the
parties reached a settlement agreement under which DOE agreed, in part,
to issue a notice of data availability requesting data for GSILs and
other incandescent lamps to assist DOE in determining whether standards
for GSILs should be amended (the first question of the rulemaking
required by 42 U.S.C. 6295(i)(6)(A)(i)).
With the removal of the Appropriations Rider in the Consolidated
Appropriations Act, 2017, DOE was no longer restricted from undertaking
the analysis and decision-making required to address the first question
presented by Congress, i.e., whether to amend energy conservation
standards for GSLs, including GSILs. Thus, on August 15, 2017, DOE
published a notice of data availability and request for information
(NODA) seeking data for GSILs and other incandescent lamps (August 2017
NODA). 82 FR 38613.
The purpose of the August 2017 NODA was to assist DOE in
determining whether standards for GSILs should be amended. (42 U.S.C.
6295(i)(6)(A)(i)(I)) Comments submitted in response to the August 2017
NODA also led DOE to re-consider the decisions it had already made with
respect to the second question presented to DOE--whether the exemptions
for certain incandescent lamps should be maintained or discontinued. 84
FR 3120, 3122 (See also 42 U.S.C. 6295(i)(6)(A)(i)(II)) As a result of
the comments received in response to the August 2017 NODA, DOE also re-
assessed the legal interpretations underlying certain decisions made in
the January 2017 Definition Final Rules. Id.
On February 11, 2019, DOE published a NOPR proposing to withdraw
the revised definitions of GSL, GSIL, and the new and revised
definitions of related terms that were to go into effect on January 1,
2020 (February 2019 Definition NOPR). 84 FR 3120. In a final rule
published September 5, 2019, DOE finalized the withdrawal of the
definitions in the January 2017 Definition Final Rules and maintained
the existing regulatory definitions of GSL and GSIL, which are the same
as the statutory definitions of those terms (September 2019 Withdrawal
Rule). 84 FR 46661. The September 2019 Withdrawal Rule revisited the
same primary question addressed in the January 2017 Definition Final
Rules, namely, the statutory requirement for DOE to determine whether
``the exemptions for certain incandescent lamps should be maintained or
discontinued.'' 42 U.S.C. 6295(i)(6)(A)(i)(II) (See also 84 FR 46661,
46667). In the rule, DOE also addressed its interpretation of the
statutory backstop at 42 U.S.C. 6295(i)(6)(A)(v) and concluded the
backstop had not been triggered. 84 FR 46661, 46663-46664. DOE reasoned
that 42 U.S.C. 6295(i)(6)(A)(iii) ``does not establish an absolute
obligation on the Secretary to publish a rule by a date certain.'' 84
FR 46661, 46663. ``Rather, the obligation to issue a final rule
prescribing standards by a date certain applies if, and only if, the
Secretary makes a determination that standards in effect for GSILs need
to be amended.'' Id. DOE further stated that, since it had not yet made
the predicate determination on whether to amend standards for GSILs,
the obligation to issue a final rule by a date certain did not yet
exist and, as a result, the condition precedent to the potential
imposition of the backstop requirement did not yet exist and no
backstop requirement had yet been triggered. Id. at 84 FR 46664.
Similar to the January 2017 Definition Final Rules, the September
2019 Withdrawal Rule clarified that DOE was not determining whether
standards for GSLs, including GSILs, should be amended. DOE stated it
would make that determination in a separate rulemaking. Id. at 84 FR
46662. DOE initiated that separate rulemaking by publishing a notice of
proposed determination (NOPD) on September 5, 2019, regarding whether
standards for GSILs should be amended (September 2019 NOPD). 84 FR
46830. In conducting its analysis for that notice, DOE used the data
and comments received in response to the August 2017 NODA and relevant
data and comments received in response to the February 2019 Definition
NOPR, and DOE tentatively determined that the current standards for
GSILS do not need to be amended because more stringent standards are
not economically justified. Id. at 84 FR 46831. DOE finalized that
tentative determination on December 27, 2019 (December 2019 Final
Determination). 84 FR 71626. DOE also concluded in the December 2019
Final Determination that, because it had made the predicate
determination not to amend standards for GSILs, there was no obligation
to issue a final rule by January 1, 2017, and, as a result, the
backstop requirement had not been triggered. Id. at 84 FR 71636.
Two petitions for review were filed in the U.S. Court of Appeals
for the Second Circuit challenging the September 2019 Withdrawal Rule.
The first petition was filed by 15 States,\14\ New York City, and the
District of Columbia. See New York v. U.S. Department of Energy, No.
19-3652 (2d Cir., filed Nov. 4, 2019). The second petition was filed by
six organizations \15\ that included environmental, consumer, and
public housing tenant groups. See Natural Resources Defense Council v.
U.S. Department of Energy, No. 19-3658 (2d Cir., filed Nov. 4, 2019).
The petitions were subsequently consolidated. Merits briefing has been
concluded, but the case has not been argued or submitted to the Circuit
panel for decision. The case has been in abeyance since March 2021,
pending further rulemaking by DOE.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\14\ The petitioning States are the States of New York,
California, Colorado, Connecticut, Illinois, Maryland, Maine,
Michigan, Minnesota, New Jersey, Nevada, Oregon, Vermont, and
Washington and the Commonwealth of Massachusetts.
\15\ The petitioning organizations are the Natural Resource
Defense Council, Sierra Club, Consumer Federation of America,
Massachusetts Union of Public Housing Tenants, Environment America,
and U.S. Public Interest Research Group.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Additionally, in two separate petitions also filed in the Second
Circuit, groups of petitioners that were essentially identical to those
that filed the lawsuit challenging the September 2019 Withdrawal Rule
challenged the December 2019 Final Determination. See Natural Resources
Defense Council v. U.S. Department of Energy, No. 20-699 (2d Cir.,
filed Feb, 25, 2020); New York v. U.S. Department of Energy, No. 20-743
(2d Cir., filed Feb. 28, 2020). On April 2, 2020, those cases were put
into abeyance pending the outcome of the September 2019 Withdrawal Rule
petitions.
On January 20, 2021, President Biden issued Executive Order (E.O.)
13990, ``Protecting Public Health and the Environment and Restoring
Science to Tackle the Climate Crisis.'' 86 FR 7037 (Jan. 25, 2021).
Section 1 of that Order lists a number of policies related to the

[[Page 1647]]

protection of public health and the environment, including reducing
greenhouse gas emissions and bolstering the Nation's resilience to
climate change. Id. at 86 FR 7041. Section 2 of the Order instructs all
agencies to review ``existing regulations, orders, guidance documents,
policies, and any other similar agency actions promulgated, issued, or
adopted between January 20, 2017, and January 20, 2021, that are or may
be inconsistent with, or present obstacles to, [these policies].'' Id.
Agencies are then directed, as appropriate and consistent with
applicable law, to consider suspending, revising, or rescinding these
agency actions and to immediately commence work to confront the climate
crisis. Id.
In accordance with E.O. 13990, on May 25, 2021, DOE published a
request for information (RFI) initiating a re-evaluation of its prior
determination that the Secretary was not required to implement the
statutory backstop requirement for GSLs. 86 FR 28001 (May 2021 Backstop
RFI). DOE solicited information regarding the availability of lamps
that would satisfy a minimum efficacy standard of 45 lm/W, as well as
other information that may be relevant to a possible implementation of
the statutory backstop. Id. On December 13, 2021, DOE published a NOPR
proposing to codify in the CFR the 45 lm/W backstop requirement for
GSLs. 86 FR 70755 (December 2021 Backstop NOPR). On May 9, 2022, DOE
published the May 2022 Backstop Final Rule codifying the 45 lm/W
backstop requirement. 87 FR 27439. In the May 2022 Backstop Final Rule,
DOE determined the backstop requirement applies because DOE failed to
complete a rulemaking for GSLs in accordance with certain statutory
criteria in 42 U.S.C. 6295(i)(6)(A).
On August 19, 2021, DOE published a NOPR to amend the current
definitions of GSL and GSIL and adopt associated supplemental
definitions to be defined as previously set forth in the January 2017
Definition Final Rules. 86 FR 46611. (August 2021 Definition NOPR). On
May 9, 2022, DOE published a final rule adopting definitions of GSL and
GSIL and associated supplemental definitions as set forth in the August
2021 Definition NOPR. 87 FR 27461 (May 2022 Definition Final Rule).
Upon issuance of the May 2022 Backstop Final Rule and the May 2022
Definition Final Rule, DOE concluded the first cycle of GSL rulemaking
required by 42 U.S.C. 6295(i)(6)(A). This NOPR initiates the second
cycle of GSL rulemaking under 42 U.S.C. 6295(i)(6)(B). As detailed
above, EPCA directs DOE to initiate this rulemaking procedure no later
than January 1, 2020. However, DOE is delayed in initiating this second
cycle because of the Appropriations Rider, DOE's evolving position
under the first rulemaking cycle, and the associated delays that
resulted in DOE certifying the backstop requirement for GSLs two years
after the January 1, 2020, date specified in the statute.
2. Current Standards
This is the second cycle of energy conservation standards
rulemakings for GSLs. As noted in section II.B of this document, in the
May 2022 Backstop Final Rule, DOE codified the statutory backstop
requirement prohibiting sales of GSLs that do not meet a 45 lm/W
requirement. Because incandescent and halogen GSLs would not be able to
meet the 45 lm/W requirement, they are not being considered in this
analysis. The analysis does take into consideration existing standards
for MBCFLs by ensuring that proposed levels do not decrease the
existing minimum required energy efficiency of MBCFLs in violation of
EPCA's anti-backsliding provision, which precludes DOE from amending an
existing energy conservation standard to permit greater energy use or a
lesser amount of energy efficiency (see 42 U.S.C. 6295(o)(1)). The
current standards for MBCFLs are summarized in Table II.1. 10 CFR
430.32(u).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\16\ The MBCFL energy conservation standards at 10 CFR
430.42(u)(1) are subject to the sales prohibition in paragraph (dd)
of this same section.

Table II.1--Existing Standards for MBCFLs
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Minimum efficacy
Lamp configuration Lamp power (W) (lm/W)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bare lamp....................... Lamp power <15.... 45.0
Lamp power >=15... 60.0
Covered lamp, no reflector...... Lamp power <15.... \16\ 45.0
15>= amp power <19 48.0
19>= amp power <25 50.0
Lamp power >=25... 55.0
Lumen Maintenance at 1,000 Hours The average of at least 5 lamps must
be a minimum 90% of initial (100-
hour) lumen output at 1,000 hours of
rated life.
Lumen Maintenance at 40% of 80% of initial (100-hour) rating (per
Rated Lifetime. ANSI C78.5 Clause 4.10).
Rapid Cycle Stress Test......... Per ANSI C78.5 and IESNA LM65 (clauses
2,3,5, and 6) exception: cycle times
must be 5 minutes on, 5 minutes off.
Lamp will be cycled once for every
two hours of rated life. At least 5
lamps must meet or exceed the minimum
number of cycles.
Lamp Life....................... >=6,000 hours as declared by the
manufacturer on packaging. <=50% of
the tested lamps failed at rated
lifetime. At 80% of rated life,
statistical methods may be used to
confirm lifetime claims based on
sample performance.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

MBCFLs fall within the Integrated Omnidirectional Short product
class (see section VI.A.1 for further details on product classes).
Because DOE determined that lamp cover (i.e., bare or covered) is not a
class-setting factor in the product class structure established in this
analysis, the baseline efficacy requirements are determined by lamp

[[Page 1648]]

wattage. Therefore, for products with wattages less than 15 W, which
fall into the Integrated Omnidirectional Short product class, DOE set
the baseline efficacy at 45 lm/W (the highest of the existing standards
for that wattage range) to prevent increased energy usage in violation
of EPCA's anti-backsliding provision. For products with wattages
greater than or equal to 15 W, which fall into the Integrated
Omnidirectional Short product class, DOE set the baseline efficacy at
60 lm/W to prevent increased energy usage in violation of EPCA's anti-
backsliding provision. Table II.2 shows the baseline efficacy
requirements for the Integrated Omnidirectional Short product class.

Table II.2--Integrated Omnidirectional Short Current Standard Efficacy
Requirements
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Minimum
Product class Lamp power (W) efficacy (lm/
W)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Integrated GSLs......................... <15 45.0
>=15 60.0
------------------------------------------------------------------------

C. Deviation From Appendix A

In accordance with section 3(a) of 10 CFR part 430, subpart C,
appendix A (appendix A), DOE notes that it is deviating from the
provisions in appendix A regarding the pre-NOPR stages for an energy
conservation standards rulemaking. Section 6(a)(1) specifies that as
the first step in any proceeding to consider establishing or amending
any energy conservation standard, DOE will publish a document in the
Federal Register announcing that DOE is considering initiating a
rulemaking proceeding. Section 6(a)(1) states that as part of that
document, DOE will solicit submission of related comments, including
data and information on whether DOE should proceed with the rulemaking,
including whether any new or amended rule would be cost effective,
economically justified, technologically feasible, or would result in a
significant savings of energy. Section 6(a)(2) of appendix A states
that if the Department determines it is appropriate to proceed with a
rulemaking, the preliminary stages of a rulemaking to issue or amend an
energy conservation standard that DOE will undertake will be a
framework document and preliminary analysis, or an advance notice of
proposed rulemaking (ANOPR). DOE finds it necessary and appropriate to
deviate from this step in Appendix A and to publish this NOPR without
conducting these preliminary stages. Completion of the second cycle of
GSL rulemaking is overdue under the January 1, 2020 statutory deadline
in 42 U.S.C. 6295(i)(6)(B), so DOE seeks to complete its statutory
obligations as expeditiously as possible. Under the requirements of 42
U.S.C. 6295(i)(6)(B)(i), DOE is to initiate a second rulemaking
procedure by January 1, 2020, to determine whether standards in effect
for GSILs should be amended. The scope of this rule is not limited to
incandescent lamp technologies and thus includes GSLs. (42 U.S.C.
6295(i)(6)(B)(ii)) Further, as discussed in section II.B.1 of this
document, in settling the lawsuit filed by NEMA following the January
2017 Definition Final Rules (Petition for Review, Nat'l Elec. Mfrs.
Ass'n v. U.S. Dep't of Energy, No. 17-1341 (4th Cir.)), DOE agreed to
use its best efforts to issue a supplemental notice of proposed
rulemaking regarding whether to amend or adopt standards for general
service light-emitting diode (LED) lamps, that may also address whether
to adopt standards for compact fluorescent lamps (CFLs), by May 2018.
Given this context, DOE has determined that proceeding with this
rulemaking as expeditiously as is reasonably practical is the
appropriate approach. Additionally, while DOE is not publishing pre-
NOPR documents, DOE has tentatively found that the methodologies used
for the March 2016 NOPR continue to apply to the current market for
GSLs. DOE has updated analytical inputs in its analysis from the March
2016 NOPR where appropriate and welcomes submission of additional data,
information, and comments.

III. General Discussion

DOE developed this proposal after considering data and information
from interested parties that represent a variety of interests.

A. Product Classes and Scope of Coverage

When evaluating and establishing energy conservation standards, DOE
divides covered products into product classes by the type of energy
used or by capacity or other performance-related features that justify
differing standards. In making a determination whether a performance-
related feature justifies a different standard, DOE must consider such
factors as the utility of the feature to the consumer and other factors
DOE determines are appropriate. (42 U.S.C. 6295(q)) For further details
on product classes, see section VI.A.1 of this document and chapter 3
of the NOPR technical support document (TSD).

B. Test Procedure

EPCA sets forth generally applicable criteria and procedures for
DOE's adoption and amendment of test procedures. (42 U.S.C. 6293)
Manufacturers of covered products must use these test procedures to
certify to DOE that their product complies with energy conservation
standards and to quantify the efficiency of their product. DOE will
finalize a test procedure establishing methodologies used to evaluate
proposed energy conservation standards prior to publication of a NOPR
proposing new or amended energy conservation standards. Section 8(d)(1)
of appendix A.
DOE's test procedures for GSILs and IRLs are set forth at 10 CFR
part 430, subpart B, appendix R. DOE's test procedure for CFLs is set
forth at 10 CFR part 430, subpart B, appendix W. DOE's test procedure
for LED lamps is set forth at 10 CFR part 430, subpart B, appendix BB.
DOE's test procedure for GSLs that are not GSILs, IRLs, CFLs, or
integrated LED lamps is set forth at 10 CFR part 430, subpart B,
appendix DD.

C. Technological Feasibility

1. General
In each energy conservation standards rulemaking, DOE conducts a
screening analysis based on information gathered on all current
technology options and prototype designs that could improve the
efficiency of the products or equipment that are the subject of the
rulemaking. As the first step in such an analysis, DOE develops a list
of technology options for consideration in consultation with
manufacturers, design engineers, and other interested parties. DOE then
determines which of those means for improving efficiency are
technologically feasible. DOE considers technologies incorporated in
commercially-available products or in working prototypes to be
technologically feasible. Sections 6(b)(3)(i) and 7(b)(1) of appendix
A.

[[Page 1649]]

After DOE has determined that particular technology options are
technologically feasible, it further evaluates each technology option
in light of the following additional screening criteria: (1)
practicability to manufacture, install, and service; (2) adverse
impacts on product utility or availability; (3) adverse impacts on
health or safety, and (4) unique-pathway proprietary technologies.
Sections 6(b)(3)(ii) through (v) and 7(b)(2) through (5) of appendix A.
Section VI.B of this document discusses the results of the screening
analysis for GSLs, particularly the designs DOE considered, those it
screened out, and those that are the basis for the standards considered
in this rulemaking. For further details on the screening analysis for
this rulemaking, see chapter 4 of the NOPR TSD.
2. Maximum Technologically Feasible Levels
When DOE proposes to adopt an amended standard for a type or class
of covered product, it must determine the maximum improvement in energy
efficiency or maximum reduction in energy use that is technologically
feasible for such product. (42 U.S.C. 6295(p)(1)) Accordingly, in the
engineering analysis, DOE determined the maximum technologically
feasible (max-tech) improvements in energy efficiency for GSLs, using
the design parameters for the most efficient products available on the
market or in working prototypes. The max-tech levels that DOE
determined for this rulemaking are described in section VI.C.4.e of
this proposed rule and in chapter 5 of the NOPR TSD.

D. Energy Savings

1. Determination of Savings
For each trial standard level (TSL), DOE projected energy savings
from application of the TSL to GSLs purchased in the 30-year period
that begins in the first full year of compliance with the proposed
standards (2029-2058).\17\ The savings are measured over the entire
lifetime of GSLs purchased in the previous 30-year period. DOE
quantified the energy savings attributable to each TSL as the
difference in energy consumption between each standards case and the
no-new-standards case. The no-new-standards case represents a
projection of energy consumption that reflects how the market for a
product would likely evolve in the absence of amended energy
conservation standards.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\17\ Each TSL is composed of specific efficiency levels for each
product class. The TSLs considered for this NOPR are described in
section VII.A of this document. DOE conducted a sensitivity analysis
that considers impacts for products shipped in a 9-year period.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

DOE used its national impact analysis (NIA) spreadsheet model to
estimate national energy savings (NES) from potential amended or new
standards for GSLs. The NIA spreadsheet model (described in section
VI.H of this document) calculates energy savings in terms of site
energy, which is the energy directly consumed by products at the
locations where they are used. For electricity, DOE reports national
energy savings in terms of primary energy savings, which is the savings
in the energy that is used to generate and transmit the site
electricity. DOE also calculates NES in terms of FFC energy savings.
The FFC metric includes the energy consumed in extracting, processing,
and transporting primary fuels (i.e., coal, natural gas, petroleum
fuels), and thus presents a more complete picture of the impacts of
energy conservation standards.\18\ DOE's approach is based on the
calculation of an FFC multiplier for each of the energy types used by
covered products or equipment. For more information on FFC energy
savings, see section VI.H.1 of this document.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\18\ The FFC metric is discussed in DOE's statement of policy
and notice of policy amendment. 76 FR 51282 (Aug. 18, 2011), as
amended at 77 FR 49701 (Aug. 17, 2012).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. Significance of Savings
To adopt any new or amended standards for a covered product, DOE
must determine that such action would result in significant energy
savings. (42 U.S.C. 6295(o)(3)(B))
The significance of energy savings offered by a new or amended
energy conservation standard cannot be determined without knowledge of
the specific circumstances surrounding a given rulemaking. For example,
some covered products and equipment have most of their energy
consumption occur during periods of peak energy demand. The impacts of
these products on the energy infrastructure can be more pronounced than
products with relatively constant demand. In evaluating the
significance of energy savings, DOE considers differences in primary
energy and FFC effects for different covered products and equipment
when determining whether energy savings are significant. Primary energy
and FFC effects include the energy consumed in electricity production
(depending on load shape), in distribution and transmission, and in
extracting, processing, and transporting primary fuels (i.e., coal,
natural gas, petroleum fuels), and thus present a more complete picture
of the impacts of energy conservation standards.
Accordingly, DOE evaluates the significance of energy savings on a
case-by-case basis. As mentioned previously, the proposed standards are
projected to result in estimated national FFC energy savings of 4.0
quads, the equivalent of the electricity use of 43 million homes in one
year. DOE has initially determined the energy savings from the proposed
standard levels are ``significant'' within the meaning of 42 U.S.C.
6295(o)(3)(B).

E. Economic Justification

1. Specific Criteria
As noted previously, EPCA provides seven factors to be evaluated in
determining whether a potential energy conservation standard is
economically justified. (42 U.S.C. 6295(o)(2)(B)(i)(I)-(VII)) The
following sections discuss how DOE has addressed each of those seven
factors in this proposed rulemaking.
a. Economic Impact on Manufacturers and Consumers
In determining the impacts of a potential amended standard on
manufacturers, DOE conducts an MIA, as discussed in section VI.J of
this document. DOE first uses an annual cash-flow approach to determine
the quantitative impacts. This step includes both a short-term
assessment--based on the cost and capital requirements during the
period between when a regulation is issued and when entities must
comply with the regulation--and a long-term assessment over a 30-year
period. The industry-wide impacts analyzed include (1) INPV, which
values the industry on the basis of expected future cash flows, (2)
cash flows by year, (3) changes in revenue and income, and (4) other
measures of impact, as appropriate. Second, DOE analyzes and reports
the impacts on different types of manufacturers, including impacts on
small manufacturers. Third, DOE considers the impact of standards on
domestic manufacturer employment and manufacturing capacity, as well as
the potential for standards to result in plant closures and loss of
capital investment. Finally, DOE takes into account cumulative impacts
of various DOE regulations and other regulatory requirements on
manufacturers.
For individual consumers, measures of economic impact include the
changes in LCC and PBP associated with new or amended standards. These
measures are discussed further in the following

[[Page 1650]]

section. For consumers in the aggregate, DOE also calculates the
national net present value of the consumer costs and benefits expected
to result from particular standards. DOE also evaluates the impacts of
potential standards on identifiable subgroups of consumers that may be
affected disproportionately by a standard.
b. Savings in Operating Costs Compared to Increase in Price (LCC and
PBP)
EPCA requires DOE to consider 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 product
that are likely to result from a standard. (42 U.S.C.
6295(o)(2)(B)(i)(II)) DOE conducts this comparison in its LCC and PBP
analysis.
The LCC is the sum of the purchase price of a product (including
its installation) and the operating expense (including energy,
maintenance, and repair expenditures) discounted over the lifetime of
the product. The LCC analysis requires a variety of inputs, such as
product prices, product energy consumption, energy prices, maintenance
and repair costs, product lifetime, and discount rates appropriate for
consumers. To account for uncertainty and variability in specific
inputs, such as product lifetime and discount rate, DOE uses a
distribution of values, with probabilities attached to each value.
The PBP is the estimated amount of time (in years) it takes
consumers to recover the increased purchase cost (including
installation) of a more-efficient product through lower operating
costs. DOE calculates the PBP by dividing the change in purchase cost
due to a more-stringent standard by the change in annual operating cost
for the year that standards are assumed to take effect.
For its LCC and PBP analysis, DOE assumes that consumers will
purchase the covered products in the first full year of compliance with
new or amended standards. The LCC savings for the considered efficiency
levels are calculated relative to the case that reflects projected
market trends in the absence of new or amended standards. DOE's LCC and
PBP analysis is discussed in further detail in section VI.F of this
document.
c. Energy Savings
Although significant conservation of energy is a separate statutory
requirement for adopting an energy conservation standard, EPCA requires
DOE, in determining the economic justification of a standard, to
consider the total projected energy savings that are expected to result
directly from the standard. (42 U.S.C. 6295(o)(2)(B)(i)(III)) As
discussed in section VI.H of this document, DOE uses the NIA
spreadsheet model to project national energy savings.
d. Lessening of Utility or Performance of Products
In establishing product classes and in evaluating design options
and the impact of potential standard levels, DOE evaluates potential
standards that would not lessen the utility or performance of the
considered products. (42 U.S.C. 6295(o)(2)(B)(i)(IV)) Based on data
available to DOE, the standards proposed in this document would not
reduce the utility or performance of the products under consideration
in this rulemaking.
e. Impact of Any Lessening of Competition
EPCA directs DOE to consider the impact of any lessening of
competition, as determined in writing by the Attorney General, that is
likely to result from a proposed standard. (42 U.S.C.
6295(o)(2)(B)(i)(V)) It also directs the Attorney General to determine
the impact, if any, of any lessening of competition likely to result
from a proposed standard and to transmit such determination to the
Secretary within 60 days of the publication of a proposed rule,
together with an analysis of the nature and extent of the impact. (42
U.S.C. 6295(o)(2)(B)(ii)) DOE will transmit a copy of this proposed
rule to the Attorney General with a request that the Department of
Justice (DOJ) provide its determination on this issue. DOE will publish
and respond to the Attorney General's determination in the final rule.
DOE invites comment from the public regarding the competitive impacts
that are likely to result from this proposed rule. In addition,
stakeholders may also provide comments separately to DOJ regarding
these potential impacts. See the ADDRESSES section for information to
send comments to DOJ.
f. Need for National Energy Conservation
DOE also considers the need for national energy and water
conservation in determining whether a new or amended standard is
economically justified. (42 U.S.C. 6295(o)(2)(B)(i)(VI)) The energy
savings from the proposed standards are likely to provide improvements
to the security and reliability of the Nation's energy system.
Reductions in the demand for electricity also may result in reduced
costs for maintaining the reliability of the Nation's electricity
system. DOE conducts a utility impact analysis to estimate how
standards may affect the Nation's needed power generation capacity, as
discussed in section VI.M of this document.
DOE maintains that environmental and public health benefits
associated with the more efficient use of energy are important to take
into account when considering the need for national energy
conservation. The proposed standards are likely to result in
environmental benefits in the form of reduced emissions of air
pollutants and greenhouse gases (GHGs) associated with energy
production and use. DOE conducts an emissions analysis to estimate how
potential standards may affect these emissions, as discussed in section
VI.K; the estimated emissions impacts are reported in section VII.B.6
of this document. DOE also estimates the economic value of emissions
reductions resulting from the considered TSLs, as discussed in section
VI.L of this document.
g. Other Factors
In determining whether an energy conservation standard is
economically justified, DOE may consider any other factors that the
Secretary deems to be relevant. (42 U.S.C. 6295(o)(2)(B)(i)(VII)) To
the extent DOE identifies any relevant information regarding economic
justification that does not fit into the other categories described
previously, DOE could consider such information under ``other
factors.''
2. Rebuttable Presumption
As set forth in 42 U.S.C. 6295(o)(2)(B)(iii), EPCA creates a
rebuttable presumption that an energy conservation standard is
economically justified if the additional cost to the consumer of a
product that meets the standard is less than three times the value of
the first year's energy savings resulting from the standard, as
calculated under the applicable DOE test procedure. DOE's LCC and PBP
analyses generate values used to calculate the effects that proposed
energy conservation standards would have on the payback period for
consumers. These analyses include, but are not limited to, the 3-year
payback period contemplated under the rebuttable-presumption test. In
addition, DOE routinely conducts an economic analysis that considers
the full range of impacts to consumers, manufacturers, the Nation, and
the environment, as required under 42 U.S.C.

[[Page 1651]]

6295(o)(2)(B)(i). The results of this analysis serve as the basis for
DOE's evaluation of the economic justification for a potential standard
level (thereby supporting or rebutting the results of any preliminary
determination of economic justification). The rebuttable presumption
payback calculation is discussed in section VI.F.11 of this proposed
rule.

IV. Scope of Coverage

This section addresses the scope of coverage of this rulemaking. 42
U.S.C. 6295(i)(6)(B)(ii) of EPCA provides that this rulemaking scope
shall not be limited to incandescent technologies. In accordance with
this provision, the scope of this rulemaking encompasses other GSLs in
addition to GSILs. Additionally, 42 U.S.C. 6295(i)(6)(B)(i)(II) of EPCA
directs DOE to consider whether the exemptions for certain incandescent
lamps should be maintained or discontinued. In this NOPR, DOE reviews
the regulatory definitions of GSL, GSIL and supporting definitions
adopted in the May 2022 Definition Final Rule and tentatively
determines that no amendments are needed with regards to maintenance or
discontinuation of exemptions. DOE is proposing minor updates to
clarify certain supplemental definitions adopted in the May 2022
Definition Final Rule.

A. Definitions of General Service Lamp, Compact Fluorescent Lamp,
General Service LED Lamp, General Service OLED Lamp, General Service
Incandescent Lamp

In the September 2019 Definition Final Rule, DOE withdrew the
definitions adopted in the January 2017 Definition Final Rules and
maintained the existing regulatory definitions of GSL and GSIL, which
are the same as the statutory definitions of those terms. 84 FR 46661,
46662. As noted in section II.B.1 of this document, in the August 2021
Definition NOPR, DOE revisited its conclusions in the September 2019
Definition Final Rule and proposed to amend the definitions of GSL and
GSIL and associated supplemental definitions to be defined as
previously set forth in the January 2017 Definition Final Rules. In the
May 2022 Definition Final Rule, DOE discussed comments received
regarding the August 2021 Definition NOPR and adopted the GSL and GSIL
definitions and associated supplemental definitions as proposed in the
August 2021 Definition NOPR. 87 FR 27461. The current regulatory
definitions for GSL, CFL, general service LED lamp, general service
OLED lamp, and GSIL are described in the following paragraphs.
A general service lamp has the following characteristics: (1) an
ANSI base; (2) able to operate at a voltage of 12 volts or 24 volts, at
or between 100 to 130 volts, at or between 220 to 240 volts, or of 277
volts for integrated lamps or is able to operate at any voltage for
non-integrated lamps; (3) has an initial lumen output of greater than
or equal to 310 lumens (or 232 lumens for modified spectrum general
service incandescent lamps) and less than or equal to 3,300 lumens; (4)
is not a light fixture; (5) is not an LED downlight retrofit kit; and
(6) is used in general lighting applications. General service lamps
include, but are not limited to, general service incandescent lamps,
compact fluorescent lamps, general service light-emitting diode lamps,
and general service organic light emitting diode lamps. General service
lamps do not include: (1) Appliance lamps; (2) Black light lamps; (3)
Bug lamps; (4) Colored lamps; (5) G shape lamps with a diameter of 5
inches or more as defined in ANSI C79.1-2002 (incorporated by
reference; see Sec. 430.3); (6) General service fluorescent lamps; (7)
High intensity discharge lamps; (8) Infrared lamps; (9) J, JC, JCD,
JCS, JCV, JCX, JD, JS, and JT shape lamps that do not have Edison screw
bases; (10) Lamps that have a wedge base or prefocus base; (11) Left-
hand thread lamps; (12) Marine lamps; (13) Marine signal service lamps;
(14) Mine service lamps; (15) MR shape lamps that have a first number
symbol equal to 16 (diameter equal to 2 inches) as defined in ANSI
C79.1-2002 (incorporated by reference; see Sec. 430.3), operate at 12
volts, and have a lumen output greater than or equal to 800; (16) Other
fluorescent lamps; (17) Plant light lamps; (18) R20 short lamps; (19)
Reflector lamps (as defined in this section) that have a first number
symbol less than 16 (diameter less than 2 inches) as defined in ANSI
C79.1-2002 (incorporated by reference; see Sec. 430.3) and that do not
have E26/E24, E26d, E26/50x39, E26/53x39, E29/28, E29/53x39, E39, E39d,
EP39, or EX39 bases; (20) S shape or G shape lamps that have a first
number symbol less than or equal to 12.5 (diameter less than or equal
to 1.5625 inches) as defined in ANSI C79.1-2002 (incorporated by
reference; see Sec. 430.3); (21) Sign service lamps; (22) Silver bowl
lamps; (23) Showcase lamps; (24) Specialty MR lamps; (25) T-shape lamps
that have a first number symbol less than or equal to 8 (diameter less
than or equal to 1 inch) as defined in ANSI C79.1-2002 (incorporated by
reference; see Sec. 430.3), nominal overall length less than 12
inches, and that are not compact fluorescent lamps (as defined in this
section); (26) Traffic signal lamps. 87 FR 27461, 27480-27481.
A compact fluorescent lamp is an integrated or non-integrated
single-base, low-pressure mercury, electric-discharge source. In this
lamp a fluorescing coating transforms some of the ultraviolet energy
generated by the mercury discharge into light. The term does not
include circline or U-shaped lamps. 10 CFR 430.2.
A general service light-emitting diode (LED) lamp is an integrated
or non-integrated LED lamp designed for use in general lighting
applications. It uses light-emitting diodes as the primary source of
light. 87 FR 27461, 27481.
A general service organic light-emitting diode (OLED) lamp is an
integrated or non-integrated OLED lamp designed for use in general
lighting applications. It uses organic light-emitting diodes as the
primary source of light. 87 FR 27461, 27481.
A general service incandescent lamp is a standard incandescent or
halogen type lamp that is intended for general service applications. It
has the following characteristics: (1) medium screw base; (2) lumen
range of not less than 310 lumens and not more than 2,600 lumens or, in
the case of a modified spectrum lamp, not less than 232 lumens and not
more than 1,950 lumens; and (3) capable of being operated at a voltage
range at least partially within 110 and 130 volts. This definition does
not apply to the following incandescent lamps--(1) An appliance lamp;
(2) A black light lamp; (3) A bug lamp; (4) A colored lamp; (5) A G
shape lamp with a diameter of 5 inches or more as defined in ANSI
C79.1-2002 (incorporated by reference; see Sec. 430.3); (6) An
infrared lamp; (7) A left-hand thread lamp; (8) A marine lamp; (9) A
marine signal service lamp; (10) A mine service lamp; (11) A plant
light lamp; (12) An R20 short lamp; (13) A sign service lamp; (14) A
silver bowl lamp; (15) A showcase lamp; and (16) A traffic signal lamp.
87 FR 27461, 27480.
As stated, this rulemaking is being conducted in accordance with 42
U.S.C. 6295(i)(6)(B). Under this provision, DOE must determine whether
exemptions for certain incandescent lamps should be maintained or
discontinued based, in part, on exempted lamp sales data collected by
the Secretary from manufacturers.
As part of the first rulemaking cycle for GSLs, in the January 2017
Definition Final Rules and May 2022 Definition Final Rule, DOE also
determined whether exemptions for certain

[[Page 1652]]

incandescent lamps should be maintained or discontinued based, in part,
on exempted lamp sales data collected by the Secretary from
manufacturers under 42 U.S.C. 6295(i)(6)(A)(i)(II). DOE conducted this
analysis with the understanding that the purpose was to ensure that a
given exemption would not impair the effectiveness of GSL standards by
leaving available a convenient substitute that was not regulated as a
GSL. Therefore, DOE based its decision for each exemption on an
assessment of whether the exemption encompassed lamps that could
provide general illumination and could functionally be a ready
substitute for lamps already covered as GSLs. The technical
characteristics of lamps in a given exemption and the volume of sales
of those lamps were also considered. 82 FR 7276, 7288; 87 FR 27461,
27465-27467. Subsequently, in the May 2022 Definition Final Rule, DOE
reaffirmed its conclusions in the January 2017 Definition Final Rules
and discontinued the exemptions from the GSIL definition for rough
service lamps; shatter-resistant lamps; three-way incandescent lamps;
vibration service lamps; reflector lamps; T-shape lamps of 40 W or less
or length of 10 inches or more; and B, BA, CA, F, G16-1/2, G25, G30, S,
M-14 lamps of 40 W or less. 87 FR 27461, 27480-27481.
DOE has reviewed the remaining exemptions from the GSIL and GSL
definitions. DOE's review of lamp specifications indicates that the
exempted lamps continue to have features that do not make them suitable
as substitutes for GSLs. Further review of the market indicates that
they remain niche products. Hence, DOE finds that the lamps exempted in
the May 2022 Definition Final Rule have not acquired technical
characteristics that make them ready substitutes for GSLs or have not
increased in sales. Therefore, DOE has tentatively determined that no
amendments are needed to the definitions of GSIL and GSL as determined
in the May 2022 Definition Final Rule.

B. Supporting Definitions

In the May 2022 Definition Final Rule, DOE adopted supporting
definitions for GSLs and GSILs as proposed in the August 2021
Definition NOPR and set forth in the January 2017 Definition Final
Rules. 87 FR 27461. These included definitions for ``black light
lamp,'' ``bug lamp,'' ``colored lamp,'' ``infrared lamp,'' ``left-hand
thread lamp,'' ``light fixture,'' ``marine lamp,'' ``marine signal
service lamp,'' ``mine service lamp,'' ``non-integrated lamp,'' ``pin
base lamp, ``plant light lamp,'' ``reflector lamp,'' ``showcase lamp,''
``sign service lamp,'' ``silver bowl lamp,'' ``specialty MR lamp,'' and
``traffic signal lamp.''
In this NOPR, DOE is proposing minor updates to certain
supplemental definitions adopted in the May 2022 Definition Final Rule.
Specifically, DOE is proposing to add an industry reference to the
definition of LED downlight retrofit kit by specifying that it must be
a retrofit kit classified or certified to UL 1598C-2014.\19\
Additionally, DOE is proposing to update the industry standards
referenced in the definitions of ``Reflector lamp'' and ``Showcase
lamp.'' The current definitions for ``Showcase lamp'' and ``Reflector
lamp'' reference ANSI C78.20-2003 \20\ and ANSI C79.1-2002.\21\ In this
NOPR, DOE is proposing to remove the reference to ANSI C78.20-2003 from
the definitions of ``Showcase lamp'' and ``Reflector lamp.'' ANSI
C78.20-2003 is an industry standard for A, G, PS, and similar shapes
with E26 bases and therefore is not relevant to these lamp types.
Further, ANSI has replaced ANSI C79.1-2002 with ANSI C78.79-2014
(R2020).\22\ ANSI 79.1-2002 is referenced in the: (1) ``Specialty MR
lamp'' definition; (2) ``Reflector lamp'' definition; (3) ``General
service incandescent lamp'' definition with respect to a G shape lamp
with a diameter of 5 inches or more; and (4) ``General service lamp''
definition with respect to G shape lamps with a diameter of 5 inches or
more; MR shape lamps that have a first number symbol equal to 16;
Reflector lamps that have a first number symbol less than 16; S shape
or G shape lamps that have a first number symbol less than or equal to
12.5; T shape lamps that have a first number symbol less than or equal
to 8. Accordingly, DOE proposes to revise the references to ANSI C79.1-
2002 to ANSI C78.79-2014 (R2020) in all the aforementioned definitions.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\19\ UL, UL1598C Standard for Safety Light-Emitting Diode (LED)
Retrofit Luminaire Conversion Kits. Approved January 12, 2017.
\20\ American National Standards Institute, ANSI C78.20-2003
American National Standard for Electric Lamps--A, G, PS, and Similar
Shapes with E26 Medium Screw Bases. Approved October 30, 2003.
\21\ American National Standards Institute, ANSI C79.1-2002
American National Standard For Electric Lamps--Nomenclature for
Glass Bulbs Intended for Use with Electric Lamps. Approved September
16, 2002.
\22\ American National Standards Institute, ANSI C 78.79-2014
(R2020) American National Standard for Electric Lamps--Nomenclature
for Envelope Shapes Intended for Use with Electric Lamps. Approved
January 17, 2020.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

DOE requests comments on the proposed updates to industry
references in the definitions of ``General service incandescent lamp,''
``General service lamp,'' ``LED downlight retrofit kit'', ``Reflector
lamp,'' ``Showcase lamp,'' and ``Specialty MR lamp.'' See section IX.E
for a list of issues on which DOE seeks comment.
In this NOPR, DOE is proposing a new supporting term, ``Circadian-
friendly integrated LED lamp'' and its definition. This lamp type will
be excluded from the GSL definition. DOE has identified commercially
available integrated LED lamps that are marketed as aiding in the human
sleep-wake (i.e., circadian) cycle by changing the light spectrum. For
example, the Soraa HEALTHYTM lamp and the NorbSLEEP lamp
specify decrease or removal of blue light from the light spectrum
emitted by the lamp to ensure proper melatonin production for better
sleep.\23\ DOE observed that these were integrated LED lamps with
efficacies ranging from 47.8 lm/W to 85.7 lm/W. Because these lamps
offer a utility to consumers and do not have high efficacies, DOE is
proposing to exempt them from standards. Hence, DOE is proposing to
define the exempt lamp type, circadian-friendly integrated LED lamp, as
an integrated LED lamp that
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\23\ Soraa HEALTHYTM, available at <a href="https://www.soraa.com/products/52-Soraa-Healthy-A19-A60.php#">https://www.soraa.com/products/52-Soraa-Healthy-A19-A60.php#</a>; NorbSLEEP,
available at <a href="https://norblighting.com/sleep/">https://norblighting.com/sleep/</a>; accessed June 29,
2020.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

(1) Is designed and marketed for use in the human sleep-wake
(circadian) cycle;
(2) Is designed and marketed as an equivalent replacement for a 40
W or 60 W incandescent lamp;
(3) Has at least one setting that decreases or removes standard
spectrum radiation emission in the 440 nm to 490 nm wavelength range;
and
(4) Is sold in packages of two lamps or less.
The first criterion specifies the application of the lamp. For the
second criterion, because these lamps are mainly available in the 500
to 800 lumen range, DOE is specifying the equivalent incandescent
wattages. For the third criterion, because these lamps provide a better
sleep-wake cycle by removing blue light, DOE has specified that the
lamp must decrease or remove emission in the 440 to 490 nm wavelength
range. In verifying a luminaire to have a certain amount of blue light
content, the Underwriters Laboratories' verification method consisted
of determining the amount of blue light radiation in the 440-490 nm
wavelength range.\24\ The fourth criterion

[[Page 1653]]

limits how many lamps are sold per package to ensure that lamps are not
sold in bulk. This type of lamp offers a specific feature to consumers.
To prevent the use of the lamp in general applications for common use,
and thereby create a loophole to GSL standards, DOE is proposing the
fourth criterion, which is consistent with the vibration service lamp
definition intended for a specialty lamp type.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\24\ Ian Ashdown, Melanopic Green The Other Side of Blue,
available at <a href="https://www.ies.org/fires/melanopic-green-the-other-side-of-blue/">https://www.ies.org/fires/melanopic-green-the-other-side-of-blue/</a>. Accessed June 29, 2020; Circadian ZircLight, Inc. UL
Verification Mark, available at <a href="https://verify.ul.com/verifications/117">https://verify.ul.com/verifications/117</a>.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

DOE requests comments on the proposed definition for ``Circadian-
friendly integrated LED lamp,'' including the packaging criterion. DOE
also requests comments on the consumer utility and efficacy potential
of lamps marketed to improve the sleep-wake cycle. See section IX.E for
a list of issues on which DOE seeks comment.

C. GSLs Evaluated for Potential Standards in This NOPR

DOE is not assessing standards for general service OLED lamps and
incandescent lamps, types of GSLs, in this NOPR analysis. OLED means a
thin-film light-emitting device that typically consists of a series of
organic layers between 2 electrical contacts (electrodes). 10 CFR
430.2. OLEDs can create diffuse light sources with direct emitters and
are also thin and bendable, allowing for new form factors. DOE reviewed
product offerings of manufacturers and retailers marketing OLED
lighting technology and did not find any that offered integrated or
non-integrated OLED lamps. Most OLED light sources are embedded within
a light panel that can range from approximately 100 to 300 lumens.\25\
The panels are being used in light fixtures such as desk lamps, hanging
ceiling light fixtures and troffers emitting lumens ranging from 75 to
1,800 lumens (depending on the number of panels used per fixture). Due
to the lack of commercially available GSLs that use OLED technology, it
is unclear whether the efficacy of these products can be increased.
Therefore, DOE is not evaluating standards for general service OLED
lamps because DOE has tentatively determined that standards for these
lamps would not be technologically feasible at this time.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\25\ U.S. Department of Energy, 2019 Lighting R&D Opportunities,
January 2020. Available at <a href="https://www.energy.gov/sites/prod/files/2020/01/f70/ssl-rd-opportunities2-jan2020.pdf">https://www.energy.gov/sites/prod/files/2020/01/f70/ssl-rd-opportunities2-jan2020.pdf</a>.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

As noted in section II.B.1 of this document, in the May 2022
Backstop Final Rule, DOE codified the 45 lm/W requirement for GSLs,
which cannot be met by incandescent and halogen lamps. Therefore, DOE
is also not analyzing standards for incandescent and halogen lamps in
this proposal.
DOE is analyzing CFLs and general service LED lamps that have a
lumen output within the range of 310-3,300 lumens; an input voltage of
12 volts or 24 volts, at or between 100 to 130 volts, at or between 220
to 240 volts, or of 277 volts for integrated lamps, or are able to
operate at any voltage for non-integrated lamps; and do not fall into
any exclusion from the GSL definition at 10 CFR 430.2 (see section IV.A
of this document).

V. Scope of Metrics

In this section DOE discusses its proposal to use minimum lumens
per watt as the metric for measuring lamp efficiency. DOE also
discusses proposed updates to existing metrics and proposed addition of
new metrics for GSLs.
Because CFLs are included in the definition of GSL, this proposed
rulemaking satisfies the requirements under 42 U.S.C 6295(m)(1) to
review existing standards for MBCFLs. The Energy Policy Act of 2005
(EPAct 2005) amended EPCA by establishing energy conservation standards
for MBCFLs, which were codified by DOE in an October 2005 final rule.
70 FR 60413. Performance requirements were specified for five metrics:
(1) minimum initial efficacy; (2) lumen maintenance at 1,000 hours; (3)
lumen maintenance at 40 percent of lifetime; (4) rapid cycle stress;
and (5) lamp life. (42 U.S.C. 6295(bb)(1)) In addition to revising the
existing requirements for MBCFLs, DOE has the authority to establish
requirements for additional metrics including color rendering index
(CRI), power factor, operating frequency, and maximum allowable start
time based on the requirements prescribed by the August 9, 2001 ENERGY
STAR[supreg] Program Requirements for CFLs Version 2.0, or establish
other requirements after considering energy savings, cost
effectiveness, and consumer satisfaction. (42 U.S.C. 6295(bb)(2)-(3))
For MBCFLs, in this NOPR, DOE is proposing to update the existing
requirements for rapid cycle stress test and lifetime and add minimum
requirements for power factor, CRI, and start time. For integrated LED
lamps, DOE is also proposing to add a minimum requirement for power
factor and for medium screw base GSLs a minimum requirement for CRI.
These proposals are discussed in the following sections.
1. Lumens per Watt (Lamp Efficacy)
As stated in section II.A, this proposed rulemaking is being
conducted under 42 U.S.C. 6295(i)(6)(B). Under 42 U.S.C.
6295(i)(6)(B)(i)(I), DOE is required to determine whether standards in
effect for GSILs should be amended to reflect lumen ranges with more
stringent maximum wattage than the standards specified in paragraph
(1)(A) [i.e., standards enacted by section 321(a)(3)(A)(ii) of EISA
\26\]. The scope of this analysis is not limited to incandescent lamp
technologies and thus encompasses GSLs. The May 2022 Backstop Final
Rule codified the statutory backstop requirement in 42 U.S.C.
6295(i)(6)(A)(v) prohibiting sales of GSLs that do not meet a 45 lm/W
efficacy standard. Because incandescent and halogen GSLs would not be
able to meet the 45 lm/W requirement, they are not being considered in
this analysis. Regarding the efficiency metric, DOE is assessing the
efficiency of GSLs based on minimum lumens per watt (i.e., lamp
efficacy) rather than maximum wattage of a lamp. Because the lamps
covered by the scope of this rulemaking span different lighting
technologies, GSLs designed to satisfy the same applications are
available in a variety of wattages. The primary utility provided by a
lamp is lumen output, which can be achieved through a wide range of
wattages depending on the lamp technology. DOE has tentatively
determined that lamps providing equivalent lumen output, and therefore
intended for the same applications, should be subject to the same
minimum efficacy requirements. Thus, DOE is proposing to use lumens per
watt as a metric to evaluate standards in this NOPR. DOE is also
proposing an equation-based approach to establish ELs so that lamps
that provide the same utility (i.e., lumen output) are subject to the
same standard. To ensure there would be no backsliding in violation of
EPCA with this approach, DOE

[[Page 1654]]

converted the maximum wattage standards for GSILs in paragraph (1)(A)
[i.e., the EISA enacted standards for GSILs] and 10 CFR 430.32(x)(1) to
be expressed in terms of lumens per watt. For each lumen output, DOE
used the corresponding maximum wattage to calculate the equivalent
lumens-per-watt requirement and determined that the 45 lm/W sales
prohibition for GSLs exceeds all maximum wattage requirements specified
in paragraph (1)(A) and 10 CFR 430.32(x)(1). Thus, standards considered
in this proposal that are in terms of lumens per watt would not
decrease the existing minimum required energy efficiency of GSLs and do
not result in backsliding.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\26\ This provision was to be codified as an amendment to 42
U.S.C. 6295(i)(1)(A). But because of an apparent conflict with
section 322(b) of EISA, which purported to ``strik[e] paragraph
(1)'' of 6295(i) and replace it with a new paragraph (1), neither
this provision nor other provisions of section 321(a)(3)(A)(ii) of
EISA that were to be codified in 42 U.S.C. 6295(i)(1) were ever
codified in the U.S. Code. Compare EISA 321(a)(3)(A)(ii), with 42
U.S.C. 6295(i)(1). It appears, however, that Congress's intention in
section 322(b) was to replace the existing paragraph (1), not
paragraph (1) as amended in section 321(a)(3). Indeed, there is no
reason to believe that Congress intended to strike these new
standards for GSILs. DOE has thus issued regulations implementing
these uncodified provisions. See, e.g., 10 CFR 430.32(x)
(implementing standards for GSILs, as set forth in section
321(a)(3)(A)(ii) of EISA).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. Power Factor
In this NOPR DOE is proposing minimum power factor requirements for
MBCFLs (see 42 U.S.C. 6295(bb)(2)-(3)) and integrated LED lamps. DOE
considered ENERGY STAR Lamps Specification V2.1 \27\ requirements,
industry standards, and characteristics of lamps in the current market
when selecting power factor requirements for MBCFL and integrated LED
lamps. DOE found the vast majority of the U.S. market reports power
factors in the range of 0.5 to 0.6 for CFLs, which is consistent with
ENERGY STAR Lamps Specification V2.1 (latest ENERGY STAR lamp
specification) and ANSI C82.77-10-2020 \28\ requirement of a minimum
power factor of 0.5 for integrated CFLs. Similarly, DOE found the vast
majority of the U.S. market reports power factors greater than 0.7 for
integrated LED lamps. DOE notes that ENERGY STAR Lamps Specification
V2.1 requires a power factor of 0.6 for omnidirectional lamps with
rated/reported input power of less than or equal to 10 watts and 0.7
for all other solid-state lamps. ANSI C82.77-10-2020 requires a minimum
power factor of 0.57 for input powers between 5 W and 25 W (inclusive);
and 0.86 for input powers greater than 25 W. DOE reviewed the lamps
database developed for this analysis and determined that of integrated
LED lamps with power factor data, 99.9 percent (about 16,700 lamps) had
a power factor of 0.7 or greater. Further, of integrated LED lamps with
wattage less than or equal to 10 W and power factor data, 99.5 percent
had a power factor 0.7 or greater. Therefore, because the vast majority
of LED lamps have a power factor of 0.7 or greater, DOE is proposing a
minimum 0.7 power factor for integrated LED lamps.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\27\ ENERGY STAR Lamps Specification V2.1, ENERGY STAR Program
Requirements for Lamps (Light Bulbs), January 2, 2017. Available at
<a href="https://www.energystar.gov/sites/default/files/ENERGY%20STAR%20Lamps%20V2.1%20Final%20Specification.pdf">https://www.energystar.gov/sites/default/files/ENERGY%20STAR%20Lamps%20V2.1%20Final%20Specification.pdf</a>.
\28\ American National Standards Institute, ANSI C82.77-10-2020,
``American National Standard for Lighting Equipment-Harmonic
Emission Limits-Related Power Quality Requirements,'' approved
January 9, 2020.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

DOE also conducted testing of low-cost LED products that have been
increasing in popularity on the market to determine if there was a
relationship between cost and power factor. In an assessment conducted
in 2016, DOE tested the power factor of 25 LED lamps with a per-lamp
cost of $5 or less. Of the 25 lamp models tested, 14 lamps had a power
factor of 0.7 or higher. Because greater than half of the lamp models
complied with a power factor requirement of 0.7, DOE tentatively
concluded that low power factor is not a requirement for a low-cost LED
lamp. DOE also reviewed the DOE product database developed for this
analysis and found 25 integrated LED lamps with a published power
factor and price of $5 or less. Of these 25 lamps, 21 lamps had a power
factor of 0.7 or higher. Thus, DOE has tentatively determined the
proposed power factor requirements are achievable and would not result
in higher costs, nor pose physical challenges. DOE is proposing a
minimum power factor for integrated lamps being analyzed for potential
standards in this NOPR of 0.7 for integrated LED lamps and 0.5 for
MBCFLs.
3. Lifetime
In this NOPR, DOE is proposing to update the minimum lifetime
standard for MBCFLs pursuant to the authority under 42 U.S.C 6295(m)(1)
to review existing MBCFL standards. Specifically, DOE is proposing to
update the existing minimum 6,000-hour requirement to 10,000 hours.
Based on a review of the market DOE has determined that the majority of
MBCFLs on the market have lifetimes of at least 10,000 hours. Further,
of the MBCFLs submitted to DOE in DOE's compliance certification
database, about 94 percent have a lifetime of at least 10,000 hours.
4. Start Time
In this NOPR, DOE is proposing a minimum start time requirement for
MBCFLs (see 42 U.S.C. 6295(bb)(2)-(3)). Specifically, DOE is proposing
that an MBCFL with standby mode power must meet a one second start time
requirement and an MBCFL without standby mode power must meet a 750
millisecond start time requirement.
This requirement aligns with the ENERGY STAR Lamps Specification
V2.1, the latest ENERGY STAR specifications regarding lamps. In ENERGY
STAR Lamps Specification V2.1, the start time for connected MBCFLs is
full illumination within one second of application of electrical power,
and for non-connected MBCFLs it is within 750 milliseconds. ENERGY STAR
defines a connected lamp as a lamp that ``includes elements (hardware
and software or firmware) or instructions required to enable
communication in response to consumer-authorized energy or performance
related commands.'' Based on this description, a connected lamp would
have standby mode power.
5. CRI
Section 321(a) of EISA established CRI requirements for lamps that
are intended for a general service or general illumination application
(whether incandescent or not); have a medium screw base or any other
screw base not defined in ANSI C81.61-2006; are capable of being
operated at a voltage at least partially within the range of 110 to 130
volts; and are manufactured or imported after December 31, 2011. For
such lamps, section 321(a) of EISA specifies a minimum CRI of 80 for
nonmodified spectrum lamps and 75 for modified spectrum lamps. Because
MBCFLs meet these criteria, as they are GSLs and used in general
service applications, have a medium screw base and a rated input
voltage range of 115 to 130 volts (see definition of ``medium base
compact fluorescent lamp'' at 10 CFR 430.2), they are subject to
section 321(a) of EISA.
In this NOPR, DOE is proposing to codify the CRI requirements in
section 321(a) of EISA. Specifically, DOE is proposing to specify that
lamps with a medium screw base or any other screw base not defined in
ANSI C81.61-2006; intended for a general service or general
illumination application (whether incandescent or not); and capable of
being operated at a voltage at least partially within the range of 110
to 130 volts, must have a minimum CRI of 80 (for non-modified spectrum
lamps) and 75 (modified spectrum lamps). Because MBCFLs meet these
specifications they would also be subject to the minimum CRI
requirements in section 321(a) of EISA.
6. Summary of Metrics
Table V.1 summarizes the non-efficacy metrics proposed in this
rulemaking (efficacy metrics are discussed in the engineering analysis;
see section VI.C of this document). DOE has determined that these
proposed new metrics for MBCFLs, integrated LED lamps, and medium base
GSLs will provide consumers with increased

[[Page 1655]]

energy savings and consumer satisfaction for those products capable of
achieving the proposed standard level. DOE has existing test procedures
for the metrics being proposed. (See section III.B for more information
on test procedures for GSLs.) Further, DOE has tentatively concluded
that the new proposed metrics will not result in substantial testing
burden, as many manufacturers already test their products according to
these metrics. DOE requests comments on the non-efficacy metrics
proposed for GSLs. See section IX.E for a list of issues on which DOE
seeks comment.

Table V.1--Non-Efficacy Metrics for Certain GSLs
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Minimum standard
Lamp type Metric considered
------------------------------------------------------------------------
MBCFLs.......................... Lumen maintenance 90 percent of
at 1,000 hours. initial lumen
output at 1,000
hours.
Lumen maintenance 80 percent of
at 40 percent of initial lumen
lifetime *. output at 40
percent of
lifetime.
Rapid cycle stress MBCFL with start
time >100 ms:
survive one cycle
per hour of
lifetime * or a
maximum of 15,000
cycles. MBCFLs
with a start time
of <=100 ms:
survive one cycle
per every two
hours of
lifetime.*
Lifetime *........ 10,000 hours.
Power factor...... 0.5.
CRI............... 80.
Start time........ The time needed
for a MBCFL to
remain
continuously
illuminated must
be within: (1)
one second of
application of
electrical power
for lamp with
standby mode
power. (2) 750
milliseconds of
application of
electrical power
for lamp without
standby mode
power.
Integrated LED Lamps............ Power factor...... 0.7.
Non-modified spectrum lamps with CRI............... 80.
a medium screw base or any
other screw base not defined in
ANSI C81.61-2006; intended for
a general service or general
illumination application
(whether incandescent or not);
capable of being operated at a
voltage at least partially
within the range of 110 to 130
volts.
Modified spectrum lamps with a CRI............... 75.
medium screw base or any other
screw base not defined in ANSI
C81.61-2006; intended for a
general service or general
illumination application
(whether incandescent or not);
capable of being operated at a
voltage at least partially
within the range of 110 to 130
volts.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Lifetime refers to lifetime of a CFLs as defined in 10 CFR 430.2.

VI. Methodology and Discussion

This section addresses the analyses DOE has performed for this
rulemaking with regard to GSLs. Separate subsections address each
component of DOE's analyses.
DOE used several analytical tools to estimate the impact of the
standards proposed in this document. The first tool is a spreadsheet
that calculates the LCC savings and PBP of potential amended or new
energy conservation standards. The NIA uses a second spreadsheet set
that provides shipments projections and calculates NES and NPV of total
consumer costs and savings expected to result from potential energy
conservation standards. DOE uses the third spreadsheet tool, the
Government Regulatory Impact Model (GRIM), to assess manufacturer
impacts of potential standards. These three spreadsheet tools are
available on the DOE website for this rulemaking: <a href="https://www1.eere.energy.gov/buildings/appliance_standards/standards.aspx?productid=4">https://www1.eere.energy.gov/buildings/appliance_standards/standards.aspx?productid=4</a>. Additionally, DOE used output from the
latest version of the Energy Information Administration's (EIA's)
Annual Energy Outlook (AEO), a widely known energy projection for the
United States, for the emissions and utility impact analyses.
In this NOPR, DOE anticipates compliance in the second half of 2028
and uses 2029 as the first full compliance year for purposes of
conducting the analysis based on the requirement in 42 U.S.C.
6295(m)(4)(B) that DOE shall not require new standards for a product
within 6 years of the compliance date of the previous standard. Since
compliance with the statutory backstop requirement for GSLs commenced
on July 25, 2022 a July 25, 2028 compliance date for any GSL standard
would provide a 6-year spread between GSL compliance dates consistent
with 42 U.S.C. 6295(m)(4)(B). A compliance date of July 25, 2028, is
also consistent with the timespan described in 42 U.S.C. 6295(i)(6)(B),
which contemplates at least a 5-year time period between any GSL rule
arising out of the first cycle of rulemaking under 42 U.S.C.
6295(i)(6)(A) and the effective date of a final rule for the second
cycle of rulemaking under 42 U.S.C. 6295(i)(6)(B). However, per 42
U.S.C. 6295(i)(6)(B)(iv)(I)-(II), for this proposed rulemaking, the
Secretary shall consider phased-in effective dates after considering
the impact of any amendments on manufacturers (e.g., retiring,
repurposing equipment, stranded investments, labor contracts, workers
and raw materials) and the time needed to work with retailers/lighting
designers to revise sales/marketing strategies. As is evident in this
analysis, DOE is collecting information and evaluating the industry and
market with respect to potential standards for GSLs.

[[Page 1656]]

DOE will be in a better position to determine whether phased-in
effective dates are necessary once it receives comments from
stakeholders on the potential standards for GSLs presented in this
NOPR. DOE requests comments on whether or not phased-in effective dates
are necessary for this rulemaking. See section IX.E for a list of
issues on which DOE seeks comment.

A. Market and Technology Assessment

DOE develops information in the market and technology assessment
that provides an overall picture of the market for the products
concerned, including the purpose of the products, the industry
structure, manufacturers, market characteristics, and technologies used
in the products. This activity includes both quantitative and
qualitative assessments, based primarily on publicly-available
information. The subjects addressed in the market and technology
assessment for this rulemaking include (1) a determination of the scope
of the rulemaking and product classes, (2) manufacturers and industry
structure, (3) existing efficiency programs, (4) shipments information,
(5) market and industry trends; and (6) technologies or design options
that could improve the energy efficiency of GSLs. The key findings of
DOE's market assessment are summarized in the following sections. See
chapter 3 of the NOPR TSD for further discussion of the market and
technology assessment.
1. Product Classes
DOE divides covered products into classes by: (a) the type of
energy used; (b) the capacity of the product; or (c) other performance-
related features that justify different standard levels, considering
the consumer utility of the feature and other relevant factors. (42
U.S.C. 6295(q)) In evaluating product class setting factors, DOE
considers their impact on both efficacy and consumer utility. In this
analysis, DOE reviewed several factors including lamp component
location, standby mode operation, base type, bulb shape, CRI,
correlated color temperature (CCT), lumens, and length. In this NOPR,
DOE proposes product class divisions based on lamp component location
(i.e., location of ballast/driver) and capability of operating in
standby mode; directionality (i.e., omnidirectional versus directional)
and lamp length (i.e., 45 inches or longer [``long''] or less than 45
inches [``short''] as product class setting factors. In the section
below, DOE discusses its proposed product class setting factors. In
chapter 3 of the NOPR TSD, DOE discusses features it considered but
determined to not be valid product class setting factors including lamp
technology, lumen package, lamp cover, dimmability, base type, lamp
spectrum, CRI and CCT. See chapter 3 of the NOPR TSD for further
discussion.
a. Lamp Component Location
Lamp component location refers to the position of the ballast or
driver. Integrated lamps have these components enclosed within the
lamp, whereas non-integrated lamps have them external to the lamp. Due
to the additional components and circuity enclosed within it, an
integrated lamp will have an inherent difference in efficacy compared
to a lamp that utilizes external components. For consumers using an
integrated lamp, there is also the utility of requiring replacement of
one lamp unit rather than two separate components. In certain cases,
integrated lamps are also generally more compact and thus can be used
in applications with size constraints. For these reasons, DOE is
proposing a product class based on lamp component location.
b. Standby Mode Operation
DOE observed that some integrated lamps have standby mode
functionality and conducted an analysis to determine its impact on lamp
efficacy. Because this functionality seems to be increasingly
incorporated in LED lamps compared to CFLs, DOE focused on LED lamps.
DOE conducted active mode and standby mode testing per DOE's integrated
LED lamp test procedure (see appendix BB). These lamps were designed
with varying communication methods, including Zigbee, Bluetooth, Wi-Fi,
and radio frequency remote controls. Almost half of the lamps tested
were operated using a central hub for communication between the end-
user and the lamp itself. DOE's test results, as presented in appendix
5a of the NOPR TSD, indicate that the tested standby power generally
varied between 0.2 W and 0.5 W. DOE finds that these results indicate
that lamps with standby power have a non-negligible standby power
consumption that will likely lower their efficacy, compared to lamps
without standby power, all things being equal. Therefore, based on
utility and impact on efficacy, DOE is proposing a product class
division based on standby mode.
c. Directionality
In this analysis, DOE assessed whether directionality should be a
product class setting factor--that is, whether a lamp designed to
direct light should be subject to separate standards from a lamp that
is not. DOE compared pairs of integrated LED lamps from the same
manufacturer with the same lumens, lifetime, range of CCT and CRI,
except one was directional (e.g., parabolic aluminized reflector
[``PAR'']) and the other omnidirectional (e.g., A-shape). DOE also
ensured the pairs were of comparable size. For example, a PAR30 was
compared with an A19--the numbers indicate the diameter in inches when
divided by 8. DOE determined that in over 80 percent of cases,
omnidirectional lamps had a higher efficacy. Additionally, by directing
or not directing light, directional and omnidirectional each provide a
unique consumer utility. DOE was unable to compare the efficacy impact
from directionality for the non-integrated lamps due to difference in
size. The non-integrated directional lamps are predominantly MR16 shape
lamps and the non-integrated omnidirectional lamps are longer tube, pin
base CFLs and their LED replacements, or linear LED lamps. However,
based on the analysis of integrated lamps, DOE has tentatively
concluded that lamps differing only in directionality, all other
attributes held constant, will likely differ in lamp efficacy. Due to
the impact of directionality on efficacy and consumer utility, DOE is
proposing directionality as a product class setting factor in this
analysis.
d. Lamp Length
Efficacy tends to increase with length. GSLs span a range of
lengths. A-shape or reflector shape lamps typically have a maximum
overall length (MOL) of about 1.8-7 inches. Pin base CFLs and their LED
replacements typically have a MOL of about 3.7-23 inches. Linear LED
lamps are 2-, 3-, 4- and 8-foot lamps. In general, of these lamps,
regardless of whether compared to integrated or non-integrated lamps,
DOE found a considerable jump in efficacy for the 4-foot (about 45
inches) linear T8 LED lamps. Further, because consumers must change a
lamp fixture to substitute lamps of different geometries for one
another, lamp length affects utility. Due to the impact of length on
efficacy and utility, DOE is proposing lamp length as a product class
setting factor--specifying the product class division between lamps of
45 inches or longer length (long) and less than 45 inches (short).
DOE did observe that 4-foot T5 and 8-foot T8 linear LED lamps were
not reaching the same efficacies as 4-foot T8 linear LED lamps. DOE has
tentatively concluded that this is not due to a technical constraint
due to diameter but rather lack of product development of 4-

[[Page 1657]]

foot T5 and 8-foot T8 linear LED lamps. DOE requests comments and data
on the impact of diameter on efficacy for linear LED lamps. Finally,
DOE observed that pin base LED lamp replacements with 2G11 bases and
lengths close to two feet are less efficacious than 2-foot linear LED
lamps. DOE requests comments on all attributes the same, how the
efficacy of pin base LED lamp replacements and linear LED lamps
compare. See section IX.E for a list of issues on which DOE seeks
comment.
e. Product Class Summary
Table VI.1 shows the product classes DOE is proposing in this NOPR.
DOE requests comments on the proposed product classes. See section IX.E
for a list of issues on which DOE seeks comment.

Table VI.1--Proposed GSL Product Classes
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Lamp component Standby mode
Lamp type location Directionality Lamp length operation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
GSLs............................ Integrated........ Omnidirectional... Short (<45 inches) Standby.
Non-Standby.
Long (>=45 inches) Non-Standby.
Directional....... All Lengths....... Standby.
Non-Standby.
Non-Integrated.... Omnidirectional... Short (<45 inches) N/A.
Long (>=45
inches)..
Directional....... All Lengths.......
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. Technology Options
In the technology assessment, DOE identifies technology options
that are feasible means of improving lamp efficacy. This assessment
provides the technical background and structure on which DOE bases its
screening and engineering analyses. To develop a list of technology
options, DOE reviewed manufacturer catalogs, recent trade publications
and technical journals, and consulted with technical experts.
In this NOPR, DOE identified 21 technology options that would be
expected to improve GSL efficacy, as measured by the applicable DOE
test procedure. The technology options are differentiated by those that
improve the efficacy of CFLs versus those that improve the efficacy of
LED lamps. Table VI.2 provides a list of technology options being
proposed in this NOPR. For further information on all technology
options considered in this NOPR, see chapter 3 of the NOPR TSD. DOE
requests comments on the proposed technology options. See section IX.E
for a list of issues on which DOE seeks comment.

Table VI.2--GSL Technology Options
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Lamp type Name of technology option Description
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CFL..................................... Highly Emissive Electrode Improved electrode coatings allow
Coatings. electrons to be more easily removed from
electrodes, reducing lamp power and
increasing overall efficacy.
Higher Efficiency Lamp Fill Fill gas compositions improve cathode
Gas Composition. thermionic emission or increase mobility
of ions and electrons in the lamp
plasma.
Higher Efficiency Phosphors Use of higher efficiency phosphors to
increase the conversion of ultraviolet
(UV) light into visible light.
Glass Coatings............. Coatings on inside of bulb reflect UV
radiation passing through the phosphor
back onto the phosphor, allowing a
greater portion of UV to be absorbed,
and thereby emit more visible light.
Multi-Photon Phosphors..... Emitting more than one visible photon for
each incident UV photon absorbed.
Cold Spot Optimization..... Improve cold spot design to maintain
optimal temperature and improve light
output.
Improved Ballast Components Use of higher-grade components to improve
efficiency of integrated ballasts.
Improved Ballast Circuit Better circuit design to improve
Design. efficiency of integrated ballasts.
Higher Efficiency Reflector Alternative reflector coatings such as
Coatings. silver, with higher reflectivity to
increase the amount of directed light.
Change to LEDs............. Replace CFL with LED technology.
LED..................................... Efficient Down Converters.. New wavelength conversion materials, such
as novel phosphor composition and
quantum dots, have the potential for
creating warm-white LEDs with improved
spectral efficiency, high color quality,
and improved thermal stability.
Improved Package Arrangements of color mixing and phosphor
Architectures. coating LEDs on the LED array that
improve package efficacy.
Improved Emitter Materials. The development of efficient red, green,
or amber LED emitters that allow for
optimization of spectral efficiency with
high color quality over a range of CCT
and which also exhibit color and
efficiency stability with respect to
operating temperature.
Alternative Substrate Emerging alternative substrates that
Materials. enable high-quality epitaxy for improved
device quality and efficacy.
Improved Thermal Interface TIMs enable high efficiency thermal
Materials (TIMs). transfer to reduce efficacy loss from
rises in junction temperature and
optimize for long-term reliability of
the device.
Improved LED Device Novel architectures for integrating LED
Architectures. chip(s) into a lamp, such as surface
mount device and chip-on-board that
improve efficacy.
Optimized Heat Sink Design. Heat sink design to improve thermal
conductivity and heat dissipation from
the LED package, thus reducing efficacy
loss from rises in junction temperature.
Active Thermal Management Devices such as internal fans and
Systems. vibrating membranes to improve thermal
dissipation from the LED chip.

[[Page 1658]]

Improved Primary Optics.... Enhancements to the primary optics of the
LED package, such as surface etching,
novel encapsulant formulations, and flip
chip design that improve light
extraction from the LED package and
reduce losses due to light absorption at
interfaces.
Improved Secondary Optics.. Reduce or eliminate optical losses from
the lamp housing, diffusion, beam
shaping, and other secondary optics to
increase efficacy using mechanisms such
as reflective coatings and improved
diffusive coatings.
Improved Driver Design..... Novel and intelligent circuit design to
increase driver efficiency.
AC LEDs.................... LEDs that operate on AC voltage,
eliminating the requirement for and
efficiency losses from the driver.
Reduced Current Density.... Driving LED chips at lower currents while
maintaining light output, and thereby
reducing the efficiency losses
associated with efficacy droop.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

B. Screening Analysis

DOE uses the following five screening criteria to determine which
technology options are suitable for further consideration in an energy
conservation standards rulemaking:
(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 and reliable installation and servicing
of a technology in commercial products could not be achieved on the
scale necessary to serve the relevant market at the time of the
projected compliance date of the standard, then that technology will
not be considered further.
(3) Impacts on product utility or product availability. If it is
determined that a technology would have a significant adverse impact on
the utility of the product for significant subgroups of consumers or
would 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 products
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 would have significant adverse impacts on health or safety,
it will not be considered further.
(5) Unique-Pathway Proprietary Technologies. If a design option
utilizes proprietary technology that represents a unique pathway to
achieving a given efficiency level, that technology will not be
considered further due to the potential for monopolistic concerns.

10 CFR part 430, subpart C, appendix A, sections 6(b)(3) and 7(b).
In summary, if DOE determines that a technology, or a combination
of technologies, fails to meet one or more of the listed five criteria,
it will be excluded from further consideration in the engineering
analysis. The reasons for eliminating any technology are discussed in
the following sections.
The subsequent sections include comments from interested parties
pertinent to the screening criteria, DOE's evaluation of each
technology option against the screening analysis criteria, and whether
DOE determined that a technology option should be excluded (screened
out) based on the screening criteria.
1. Screened-Out Technologies
In this NOPR, DOE is proposing to screen out multi-photon phosphors
for CFLs, and quantum dots and improved emitter materials for LED lamps
based on the first criterion on technological feasibility. In its
review of technologies for this analysis, DOE did not find evidence
that multi-photon phosphors, quantum dots, or improved emitter
materials are being used in commercially available products or
prototypes.
In this NOPR, DOE is proposing to screen out AC LEDs based on the
second and third criteria, respectively practicability to manufacture,
install, and service and adverse impacts on product utility or product.
The only commercially available AC LED lamps that DOE found were G-
shapes between 330 and 360 lumens or candle shapes between 220 and 400
lumens. Therefore, it is unclear whether the technology could be made
for a wide range of products on a commercial scale and in particular
for those being considered in this document.
2. Remaining Technologies
Through a review of each technology, DOE tentatively concludes that
all of the other identified technologies listed in section VI.A.2 of
this document met all five screening criteria and are examined further
as design options in this analysis. In summary, DOE did not screen out
the following technology options:

CFL Design Options
<bullet> Highly Emissive Electrode Coatings
<bullet> Higher Efficiency Lamp Fill Gas Composition
<bullet> Higher Efficiency Phosphors
<bullet> Glass Coatings
<bullet> Cold Spot Optimization
<bullet> Improved Ballast Components
<bullet> Improved Ballast Circuit Design
<bullet> Higher Efficiency Reflector Coatings
<bullet> Change to LEDs

LED Design Options
<bullet> Efficient Down Converters (with the exception of quantum dot
technologies)
<bullet> Improved Package Architectures
<bullet> Alternative Substrate Materials
<bullet> Improved Thermal Interface Materials
<bullet> Improved LED Device Architectures
<bullet> Optimized Heat Sink Design
<bullet> Active Thermal Management Systems
<bullet> Improved Primary Optics
<bullet> Improved Secondary Optics
<bullet> Improved Driver Design
<bullet> Reduced Current Density

DOE has initially determined that these technology options are
technologically feasible because they are being used or have previously
been used in commercially-available products or working prototypes. DOE
also finds that all of the remaining technology options meet the other
screening criteria (i.e., practicable to manufacture, install, and
service and do not result in adverse impacts on consumer utility,
product availability, health, or safety, unique-pathway proprietary
technologies). For additional details, see chapter 4 of the NOPR TSD.
DOE requests comments on the design options it has identified. See
section IX.E for a list of issues on which DOE seeks comment.

C. Engineering Analysis

The purpose of the engineering analysis is to establish the
relationship between the efficiency and cost of GSLs. There are two
elements to consider in the engineering analysis; the selection of

[[Page 1659]]

efficiency levels to analyze (i.e., the ``efficiency analysis'') and
the determination of product cost at each efficiency level (i.e., the
``cost analysis''). In determining the performance of higher-efficiency
products, DOE considers technologies and design option combinations not
eliminated by the screening analysis. For each product class, DOE
estimates the baseline cost, as well as the incremental cost for the
product at efficiency levels above the baseline. The output of the
engineering analysis is a set of cost-efficiency ``curves'' that are
used in downstream analyses (i.e., the LCC and PBP analyses and the
NIA).
1. Efficiency Analysis
DOE typically uses one of two approaches to develop energy
efficiency levels for the engineering analysis: (1) relying on observed
efficiency levels in the market (i.e., the efficiency-level approach),
or (2) determining the incremental efficiency improvements associated
with incorporating specific design options to a baseline model (i.e.,
the design-option approach). Using the efficiency-level approach, the
efficiency levels established for the analysis are determined based on
the market distribution of existing products (in other words, based on
the range of efficiencies and efficiency level ``clusters'' that
already exist on the market). Using the design option approach, the
efficiency levels established for the analysis are determined through
detailed engineering calculations and/or computer simulations of the
efficiency improvements from implementing specific design options that
have been identified in the technology assessment. DOE may also rely on
a combination of these two approaches. For example, the efficiency-
level approach (based on actual products on the market) may be extended
using the design option approach to ``gap fill'' levels (to bridge
large gaps between other identified efficiency levels) and/or to
extrapolate to the max-tech level (particularly in cases where the max-
tech level exceeds the maximum efficiency level currently available on
the market).
In this NOPR, DOE relies on an efficiency-level approach. For GSLs,
efficiency levels (ELs) are determined as lumens per watt which is also
referred to as the lamp's efficacy (see section V.1 of this document).
DOE derives ELs in the engineering analysis and end-user prices in the
cost analysis. DOE estimates the end-user price of GSLs directly
because reverse-engineering a lamp is impractical as the lamps are not
easily disassembled. By combining the results of the engineering
analysis and the cost analysis, DOE derives typical inputs for use in
the LCC and NIA. Section VI.D discusses the cost analysis (see chapter
5 of the NOPR TSD for further details).
The engineering analysis is generally based on commercially
available lamps that incorporate the design options identified in the
technology assessment and screening analysis. (See chapters 3 and 4 of
the NOPR TSD for further information on technology and design options.)
The methodology consists of the following steps: (1) selecting
representative product classes, (2) selecting baseline lamps, (3)
identifying more efficacious substitutes, and (4) developing ELs by
directly analyzing representative product classes and then scaling
those ELs to non-representative product classes. The details of the
engineering analysis are discussed in chapter 5 of the NOPR TSD. The
following discussion summarizes the general steps of the engineering
analysis:
Representative product classes: DOE first reviews covered lamps and
the associated product classes. When a product has multiple product
classes, DOE selects certain classes as ``representative'' and
concentrates its analytical effort on these classes. DOE selects
representative product classes primarily because of their high market
volumes and/or distinct characteristics.
Baseline lamps: For each representative product class, DOE selects
a baseline lamp as a reference point against which to measure changes
resulting from energy conservation standards. The baseline model in
each product class represents the characteristics of a product typical
of that class (e.g., wattage, lumen output, CCT, CRI, shape, and
lifetime). Generally, a baseline model is one that just meets current
energy conservation standards, or, if no standards are in place, the
baseline is typically the most common or least efficient unit on the
market.
More efficacious substitutes: DOE selects higher efficacy lamps as
replacements for each of the baseline models considered. When selecting
higher efficacy lamps, DOE considers only design options that meet the
criteria outlined in the screening analysis (see section VI.B or
chapter 4 of the NOPR TSD). DOE also seeks to maintain the baseline
lamp's characteristics, such as base type, CCT, and CRI among other
specifications, for substitute lamps. To calculate efficacy, DOE uses
the ANSI rated wattage of the lamp, or nominal wattage if the ANSI
rated wattage is not available. For the Non-integrated product classes,
DOE pairs each lamp with an appropriate ballast because these lamps are
a component of a system, and their performance is related to the
ballast on which they operate.
Efficiency levels (ELs): After identifying the more efficacious
substitutes for each baseline lamp, DOE develops ELs. DOE bases its
analysis on three factors: (1) the design options associated with the
specific lamps studied; (2) the ability of lamps across lumen packages
to comply with the standard level of a given product class; and (3) the
max-tech EL. DOE then scales the ELs of representative product classes
to any classes not directly analyzed. As part of DOE's analysis, the
maximum available efficacy level is the most efficacious unit currently
available on the market. DOE also defines a ``max-tech'' efficacy level
to represent the maximum possible efficacy for a given product.
For engineering analysis, DOE developed a lamps database using data
from manufacturer catalogs, ENERGY STAR Certified Light Bulbs
database,\29\ DOE's compliance certification database,\30\ and retailer
websites. DOE used performance data of lamps from one of these sources
in the following general order of priority: DOE's compliance
certification database, manufacturer catalog, ENERGY STAR database, and
retailer websites. In addition, DOE reviewed applicable lamps in the
CEC's Appliance Efficiency Database.\31\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\29\ The most recent ENERGY STAR Certified Light Bulbs database
can be found at <a href="https://www.energystar.gov/productfinder/product/certified-light-bulbs/results">https://www.energystar.gov/productfinder/product/certified-light-bulbs/results</a>. Last accessed June 17, 2020.
\30\ DOE's compliance certification database can be found at
<a href="https://www.regulations.doe.gov/certification-data/#q=Product_Group_s%3A*">https://www.regulations.doe.gov/certification-data/#q=Product_Group_s%3A*</a>. Last accessed by June 17, 2020.
\31\ The most recent CEC Appliance Efficiency Database can be
found at <a href="https://www.energy.ca.gov/appliances/">https://www.energy.ca.gov/appliances/</a>. Last accessed June
17, 2020.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. Representative Product Classes
In the case where a covered product has multiple product classes,
DOE identifies and selects certain product classes as
``representative'' and concentrates its analytical effort on those
classes. DOE chooses product classes as representative primarily
because of their high market volumes and/or unique characteristics. DOE
then scales its analytical findings for those representative product
classes to other product classes that are not directly analyzed.
In this NOPR, DOE is proposing to establish eight product classes:
(1)

[[Page 1660]]

Integrated Omnidirectional Short Standby Mode, (2) Integrated
Omnidirectional Short Non-standby Mode, (3) Integrated Directional
Standby Mode, (4) Integrated Directional Non-standby Mode, (5)
Integrated Omnidirectional Long, (6) Non-integrated Omnidirectional
Short, (7) Non-integrated Omnidirectional Long, and (8) Non-integrated
Directional. With the exception of the Non-integrated Omnidirectional
Long product class and all the Standby Mode product classes, DOE
directly analyzed all other proposed product classes.
DOE directly analyzed Directional and Omnidirectional product
classes. The Directional product classes consist of reflector lamps and
lamps with MRX and AR shapes. Reflector lamp is defined by DOE as a
lamp that has an R, PAR, BPAR, BR, ER, MR, or similar bulb shape and is
used to provide directional light. (See proposed updates to industry
references in the reflector lamp definition in section IV.B) The
Omnidirectional product classes consist of shapes designed to output
light in a non-directional manner such as the A, B, BA, CA, F, G, T
shapes. Because of the distinctive difference in design, the
Directional and Omnidirectional product classes cannot be scaled from
each other and were directly analyzed.
DOE also directly analyzed the Long (45 inches or longer) and Short
(shorter than 45 inches) product classes. The lamps in the Short
product classes are mainly the A, B, BA, CA, F, G, R, PAR, BPAR, BR,
ER, MR shapes or configurations of short multiple tubes (e.g., pin base
CFLs). The lamps in the Long product classes are linear single tubes
(e.g., 4-foot T8 linear LED lamps). Because of the distinctive
difference in shape and size, the Short and Long product classes cannot
be scaled from each other and were directly analyzed.
As noted in section VI.A.1.a of this document, integrated lamps
contain all the components necessary for operation within the lamp,
whereas non-integrated lamps have components such as a ballast or
driver external to the lamp. Due to this distinction in design, DOE
directly analyzed both the Integrated and Non-integrated product
classes with the exception of the Non-integrated Omnidirectional Long
product class.
In this analysis, DOE scales the Non-integrated Omnidirectional
Long product class from the Integrated Omnidirectional Long product
class. There are three main types of linear LED lamps and LED lamps
that are replacements for pin base CFLs: (1) Type A lamps have an
internal driver and connect to the existing fluorescent lamp ballast;
(2) Type B lamps have an internal driver and connect to the main line
voltage; and (3) Type C lamps connect to an external, remote driver. In
this analysis, DOE considers Type A and Type C lamps as non-integrated
lamps because they require an external component to operate, whereas
Type B lamps are integrated lamps as they can be directly connected to
the main line voltage. There are also hybrid lamps that are both Type A
and B. DOE classifies these lamps as integrated as they can be operated
without an external component. Hence, the Non-integrated
Omnidirectional Long product class consists of Type A and Type C linear
LED lamps and the Integrated Omnidirectional Long product class
consists of Type B and Type A/B linear LED lamps. DOE determined that
lamps in both these product classes are the same in shape and size, and
tentatively concluded the internal versus external components would not
preclude them from being scaled from or to one another. Based on
manufacturer feedback, Type B lamps are a more robust replacement
solution, and the professional and consumer markets are moving away
from the Type A and Type C replacements. Hence, DOE directly analyzed
the Integrated Omnidirectional Long product class (containing Type B,
A/B lamps) and scaled the resulting ELs to derive ELs for the Non-
integrated Omnidirectional Long product class (containing Type A and C
lamps).
Finally, DOE is also directly analyzing product classes without
standby mode functionality and scaling to product classes that have
this functionality. DOE observed only integrated lamps to have standby
mode functionality. Because integrated lamps with standby functionality
are fundamentally the same as lamps without standby functionality but
with the addition of wireless communication components, DOE did not
directly analyze the integrated product classes capable of operating in
standby mode, but rather scaled from the integrated lamps without
standby functionality. DOE chose to directly analyze lamps without
standby mode as they remain representative of the majority of the
market.
In summary, DOE directly analyzed the product classes shown in grey
shading in Table VI.3 as representative in this NOPR. See chapter 5 of
the NOPR TSD for further discussion. DOE requests comments on the
representative product classes (i.e., product classes directly
analyzed) identified for this analysis. See section IX.E for a list of
issues on which DOE seeks comment.

Table VI.3--General Service Lamps Representative Product Classes
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Standby mode
Lamp type Lumen package Directionality Lamp length operation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
GSLs............................ Integrated........ Omnidirectional... Short (<45 inches) Standby.
Non-Standby.
Long (>=45 inches) Non-Standby.
Directional All Lengths....... Standby.
(reflector lamps). Non-Standby.
Non-Integrated.... Omnidirectional... Short (<45 inches) N/A.
Long (>=45 inches)
Directional All Lengths.......
(reflector lamps).
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

3. Baseline Lamps
Once DOE identifies representative product classes for analysis, it
selects baseline lamps to analyze in each class. Typically, a baseline
lamp is the most common, least efficacious lamp that meets existing
energy conservation standards. Specific lamp characteristics were used
to characterize the most common lamps purchased by consumers (e.g.,
wattage, CCT, CRI, and lumen output). Because certain products within
the scope of this rulemaking have existing standards, GSLs that fall
within the same product class as these lamps must meet the existing
standard in order to prevent backsliding of current standards in
violation of EPCA. (See 42 U.S.C. 6295(o)(1)) Specifically, the
Integrated Omnidirectional Short product class consists of MBCFLs for

[[Page 1661]]

which there are existing DOE standards. The other product classes do
not have existing DOE standards but are subject to the statutory
backstop requirement of 45 lm/W. DOE requests comments on the baseline
lamps selected for each representative product class (i.e., Integrated
Omnidirectional Short Non-standby Mode, Integrated Directional Non-
standby Mode, Integrated Omnidirectional Long, Non-integrated
Omnidirectional Short, and Non-integrated Directional). See section
IX.E for a list of issues on which DOE seeks comment.
a. Integrated Omnidirectional Short Product Class
The Integrated Omnidirectional Short product class consists of the
A, B, BA, CA, F, G, T shapes as well as linear and U-shape tubular LED
lamps (Type B, A/B) that are less than 45 inches (e.g., 2-foot linear
or U-shape, 3-foot linear LED lamps). Based on common characteristics
of lamps in this product class, DOE identified the baseline lamp as a
15 W, 900-lumen (i.e., 60 W equivalent) spiral CFL with lifetime of
10,000 hours, CRI of 82, and CCT of 2,700 K. The baseline lamp for the
Integrated Omnidirectional Short product class identified in this
analysis is specified in Table VI.4.

Table VI.4--Baseline Lamps for Integrated Omnidirectional Short Product Class
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Nominal Initial Rated
Representative product class Lamp shape Base type Lamp type wattage lumens efficacy Lifetime CCT (K) CRI
(W) (lm) (lm/W) (hr)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Integrated Omnidirectional Short............ Spiral E26 CFL 15 900 60.0 10,000 2,700 82
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

b. Integrated Omnidirectional Long Product Class
The Integrated Omnidirectional Long product class consists of
linear tubular LED lamps. These are Type B or Type A/B lamps that
contain an internal driver and can be connected directly to the main
line voltage. Based on common characteristics of lamps in this product
class, DOE identified a 15 W 4-foot T8 Linear LED lamp with a medium
bipin base, 1,800 lumens, lifetime of 50,000 hours, CRI of 80, and CCT
of 4,000 K as the baseline lamp. The baseline lamp for the Integrated
Omnidirectional Long product class identified in this analysis is
specified in Table VI.5.

Table VI.5--Baseline Lamps for Integrated Omnidirectional Long Product Class
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Nominal Initial Rated
Representative product class Lamp shape Lamp Base type Lamp type wattage lumens efficacy Lifetime CCT (K) CRI
length (W) (lm) (lm/W) (hr)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Integrated Omnidirectional Long. T8 4-Foot Medium LED 15 1,800 120.0 50,000 4,000 80
Bipin
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

c. Integrated Directional Product Class
The Integrated Directional product class consists of reflector
shape lamps. Based on common characteristics of lamps in this product
class, DOE identified a 23 W, PAR38 shape CFL with an E26 base, 1,100
lumens, lifetime of 10,000 hours, CRI of 82, and CCT of 2,700 K as the
baseline lamp. The baseline lamp for the Integrated Directional product
class identified in this analysis is specified in Table VI.6.

Table VI.6--Baseline Lamps for Integrated Directional Product Class
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Nominal Initial Rated
Representative product class Lamp shape Base type Lamp type wattage lumens efficacy Lifetime CCT (K) CRI
(W) (lm) (lm/W) (hr)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Integrated directional...................... PAR38 E26 CFL 23 1,100 47.8 10,000 2,700 82
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Table VI.7--Baseline Lamps for Non-Integrated Omnidirectional Short Product Class
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Nominal Initial Rated
Product class Base type Lamp shape Lamp type wattage lumens efficacy Lifetime CCT (K) CRI
(W) (lm) (lm/W) (hr)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Non-Integrated Omnidirectional Short........ G24q-3 Double CFL 26.0 1,700 65.4 10,000 4,100 82
Tube
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[[Page 1662]]

e. Non-Integrated Directional Product Class
The Non-integrated Directional product class consists of reflector
shape lamps that mainly operate at 12 V. Based on common
characteristics of lamps in this product class, DOE identified an 8 W
MR16 shape LED with a GU5.3 base, 500 lumens, lifetime of 25,000 hours,
CRI of 80, and CCT of 2,700 K as the baseline lamp. The baseline lamp
for the Non-integrated Directional product class identified in this
analysis is specified in Table VI.8.

Table VI.8--Baseline Lamps for Non-integrated Directional Product Class
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Nominal Initial Rated
Product class Base type Lamp shape Lamp type wattage lumens efficacy Lifetime CCT (K) CRI
(W) (lm) (lm/W) (hr)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Non-Integrated Directional.................. GU5.3 MR16 LED 8.0 500 62.5 25,000 2,700 80
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

4. More Efficacious Substitutes
DOE selects a series of more efficacious replacements for the
baseline lamps considered within each representative product class. DOE
considered only technologies that met all five criteria in the
screening analysis. These selections were made such that the more
efficacious substitute lamp saved energy and had light output within 10
percent of the baseline lamp's light output, when possible. DOE also
sought to keep characteristics of substitute lamps, such as CCT, CRI,
and lifetime, as similar as possible to the baseline lamps. DOE
selected more efficacious substitutes with the same base type as the
baseline lamp since replacing an integrated lamp with a lamp of a
different base type would potentially require a fixture or socket
change and thus is considered an unlikely replacement. In identifying
the more efficacious substitutes, DOE utilized the lamps database of
commercially available GSLs it developed for this analysis (see section
VI.C.1). Further details specific to the more efficacious substitutes
of the representative product classes are discussed in the following
sections. DOE requests comments on the more efficacious substitutes
selected for each representative product class (i.e., Integrated
Omnidirectional Short Non-standby Mode, Integrated Directional Non-
standby Mode, Integrated Omnidirectional Long, Non-integrated
Omnidirectional Short, and Non-integrated Directional). See section
IX.E for a list of issues on which DOE seeks comment.
a. Integrated Omnidirectional Short Product Class
For the Integrated Omnidirectional Short product class, DOE's
survey of the market showed the number of 15,000-hour LED lamps were
comparable to 25,000-hour LED lamps. Additionally, ENERGY STAR Lamps
Specification V2.1, effective January 2, 2017, requires LED lamps to
have a lifetime of at least 15,000 hours. Hence, for the Integrated
Omnidirectional Short product class, DOE analyzed more efficacious
substitutes with 25,000-hour lifetimes and 15,000-hour lifetimes at ELs
where lamps with both lifetimes were available (i.e., EL 3, EL 4). DOE
analyzed lamps with each lifetime as more efficacious substitutes
because they are both readily available alternatives that are part of a
growing market and have unique life-cycle costs and payback periods
associated with them. For the Integrated Omnidirectional Short product
class, DOE also ensured that the more efficacious substitutes were
marketed as omnidirectional, thus maintaining the even light
distribution of the baseline lamp.
As noted, the Integrated Omnidirectional Short product class
consists of the A, B, BA, CA, F, G, T shapes as well as linear and U-
shape tubular LED lamps (Type B, A/B) that are less than 45 inches
(e.g., 2-foot linear and U-shape, 3-foot linear LED lamps). The more
efficacious substitutes analyzed in this NOPR for the representative
Integrated Omnidirectional Short product class are summarized in Table
VI.9.

Table VI.9--Representative Lamp Units in the Integrated Omnidirectional Short Product Class
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Nominal Initial Rated
Product class EL Lifetime Lamp shape Base type Lamp type wattage lumens efficacy A-value * CCT (K) CRI
(hr) (W) (lm) (lm/W)
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Integrated Omnidirectional Short Baseline........... 10,000 Spiral............. E26................ CFL............... 15.0 900 60.0 -40.0 2,700 82
EL 1............... 10,000 Spiral............. E26................ CFL............... 14.0 900 64.3 -35.7 2,700 82
EL 2............... 10,000 Spiral............. E26................ CFL............... 13.0 900 69.2 -30.8 2,700 83
EL 3............... 15,000 A19................ E26................ LED............... 10.0 800 80.0 -18.5 2,700 80
25,000 A19................ E26................ LED............... 10.0 800 80.0 -18.5 2,700 84
EL 4............... 15,000 A19................ E26................ LED............... 9.0 800 88.9 -9.6 2,700 80
25,000 A19................ E26................ LED............... 9.0 800 88.9 -9.6 2,700 80
EL 5............... 15,000 A19................ E26................ LED............... 8.0 800 100.0 1.5 2,700 81
EL 6............... 15,000 A19................ E26................ LED............... 7.0 800 114.3 15.8 2,700 82
EL 7............... 15,000 A19................ E26................ LED............... 6.5 810 124.6 25.9 2,700 80
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* The A-value is a variable in the equation form (a curve) being proposed to specify the minimum efficacy standard for GSLs. The A-value specifies the height of the equation form and thereby
indicates the level of efficacy (see section VI.C.5.a).

b. Integrated Omnidirectional Long Product Class
The Integrated Omnidirectional Long product class consists of
linear tubular LED lamps 45 inches or longer that are Type B or Type A/
B. DOE identified more efficacious substitutes that save energy, have
light output within 10 percent of baseline lamp, and have
characteristics similar to the baseline lamp. The more efficacious
substitutes analyzed in this analysis for the representative Integrated
Omnidirectional Long product class are summarized in Table VI.10. DOE
requests comments on whether any characteristics (e.g., diameter [T5,
T8]) may prevent or allow a linear LED lamp to achieve high efficacies.
See section IX.E for a list of issues on which DOE seeks comment.

[[Page 1663]]

Table VI.10--Representative Lamp Units in the Integrated Omnidirectional Long Product Class
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Nominal Initial Rated
Product class El Lifetime Lamp shape Base type Lamp type wattage lumens efficacy A-value CCT (K) CRI
(hr) (W) (lm) (lm/W)
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Integrated Omnidirectional Long. Baseline........... 50,000 T8 Linear.......... Medium Bipin....... LED............... 15.0 1,800 120.0 17.5 4,000 80
EL 1............... 50,000 T8 Linear.......... Medium Bipin....... LED............... 14.0 1,800 128.6 26.1 4,000 82
EL 2............... 50,000 T8 Linear.......... Medium Bipin....... LED............... 12.5 1,750 140.0 37.5 4,000 83
EL 3............... 50,000 T8 Linear.......... Medium Bipin....... LED............... 12.0 1,800 150.0 47.5 4,000 82
EL 4............... 50,000 T8 Linear.......... Medium Bipin....... LED............... 11.5 1,800 156.5 54.0 4,000 82
EL 5............... 50,000 T8 Linear.......... Medium Bipin....... LED............... 10.5 1,700 161.9 59.4 4,000 82
EL 6............... 50,000 T8 Linear.......... Medium Bipin....... LED............... 9.2 1,625 176.6 74.1 4,000 83
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

c. Integrated Directional Product Class
The Integrated Directional product class consists of reflector
shapes. While the baseline lamp for the Integrated Directional product
class is a CFL, the more efficacious substitutes are integrated LED
lamps. Because there is a considerable difference in lifetimes between
CFL and LED technology, the more efficacious substitutes have lifetimes
of 25,000 hours rather than the baseline 10,000 hours. The most common
lifetime among the LED lamps in this product class is 25,000 hours.
Aside from technology and lifetime, the more efficacious substitutes
have characteristics similar to the baseline lamp, have light output
within 10 percent of the baseline lamp, and save energy. The more
efficacious substitutes analyzed for the representative Integrated
Directional product class are summarized in Table VI.11.

Table VI.11--Representative Lamp Units in the Integrated Directional Product Class
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Nominal Initial Rated
Product class EL Lifetime Lamp shape Base type Lamp type wattage lumens efficacy A-value CCT (K) CRI
(hr) (W) (lm) (lm/W)
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Integrated Directional.......... Baseline........... 10,000 PAR38.............. E26................ CFL............... 23.0 1,100 47.8 94.7 2,700 82
EL 1............... 25,000 PAR38.............. E26................ LED............... 17.0 1,200 70.6 72.6 2,700 80
EL 2............... 25,000 PAR38.............. E26................ LED............... 16.0 1,200 75.0 68.2 2,700 80
EL 3............... 25,000 PAR38.............. E26................ LED............... 15.0 1,200 80.0 63.2 2,700 83
EL 4............... 25,000 PAR38.............. E26................ LED............... 14.0 1,200 85.7 57.5 2,700 82
EL 5............... 25,000 PAR38.............. E26................ LED............... 12.5 1,200 96.0 47.2 2,700 83
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

d. Non-Integrated Omnidirectional Short Product Class
The Non-integrated Omnidirectional Short product class mainly
consists of pin base CFLs and their LED replacements as well as linear
and U-shape tubular LED lamps (Type A, C) less than 45 inches (e.g., 2-
foot linear and U-shape, 3-foot linear LED lamps). For non-integrated
GSLs that operate on a ballast, DOE considered more efficacious lamps
that did not increase energy consumption relative to the baseline and
had light output approximately within 10 percent of the baseline lamp-
and-ballast system when possible. Due to potential physical and
electrical constraints associated with switching base types, DOE
selected substitute lamps that had the same base type as the baseline
lamp. DOE paired each representative lamp with an appropriate ballast
because non-integrated GSLs are a component of a system, and their
performance is related to the ballast on which they operate.
LED Lamp Replacements for Non-Integrated CFLs
DOE conducted a thorough analysis of the LED replacements for non-
integrated CFLs and found varied product offerings of efficacies,
lumens, wattages, and bases. DOE also found that a little more than
half of LED replacements include ballast com

[…truncated; see source link]

View on FederalRegister.gov →Plain-text source

Indexed from Federal Register on January 11, 2023.

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.