Rules Concerning Disclosures of Information About Energy Consumption and Water Use for Certain Home Appliances and Other Products Required Under the Energy Policy and Conservation Act; Final Rule FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION
Federal RegisterMay 13, 1994
Ask Donna
What actually matters in this document.
Text
SUMMARY: The Federal Trade Commission (``Commission'') issues final
rules that add general service fluorescent lamps, medium base
(integrally ballasted) compact fluorescent lamps, and general service
incandescent lamps (both reflector and nonreflector) to the list of
products subject to provisions of the above referenced rule, commonly
referred to as the Appliance Labeling Rule (``Rule''). Lamps often are
referred to as ``light bulbs'' or ``electric lights.'' This action is
taken pursuant to the Energy Policy Act of 1992 (``EPA 92''), which
directed the Commission to prescribe, by April 25, 1994, rules
requiring such lamp products to be labeled with disclosures that will
enable purchasers to select the most energy efficient lamps that meet
their requirements. At the same time, the Commission temporarily stays
Sec. 305.8(a)(3) of the Rule, which requires manufacturers to file
annual reports, until the U.S. Department of Energy adopts test
procedures for lamps under EPA 92. The Commission also exempts from the
requirements of Secs. 305.11(e) and 305.14(d) of the Rule, which
require disclosures on labels and in catalogs, those lamp products that
will be eliminated from the market as of October 31, 1995, by minimum
efficiency standards specified in EPA 92.
EFFECTIVE DATE: May 15, 1995.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kent C. Howerton, James G. Mills, or
Terrence J. Boyle, Attorneys, Federal Trade Commission, Bureau of
Consumer Protection, Division of Enforcement, Room S-4631, 601
Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20580, telephone numbers 202-
326-3013, 202-326-3035, and 202-326-3016, respectively.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Introduction
EPA 92\1\ amends in several respects the Energy Policy and
Conservation Act of 1975 (``EPCA''), which requires the Commission to
prescribe labeling rules for certain major household appliances and
other products.\2\ The EPA 92 amendments to EPCA direct the Commission,
within 18 months of the statute's enactment, to prescribe rules
requiring that certain types of lamp products be labeled with ``such
information as the Commission deems necessary to enable consumers to
select the most energy efficient lamps which meet their
requirements.''\3\ Pursuant to this statutory directive, the Commission
published a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (``NPR'') on November 15,
1993, soliciting written public comments on proposed amendments to the
Appliance Labeling Rule (``Rule''), 16 CFR part 305 (1993), to include
these categories of lamp products.\4\ The Commission also conducted a
Public Workshop-Conference (``Workshop'') on January 19, 1994, to
discuss the proposed amendments, and accepted supplemental written
comments from the Workshop participants following the completion of the
Workshop.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\Public Law 102-486, 106 Stat. 2776, 2817-2832 (Oct. 24, 1992)
(codified in 42 U.S.C. 6201, 6291-6309).
\2\42 U.S.C. 6291 et seq. EPCA also has been amended by the
National Energy Conservation Policy Act of 1978 (``NECPA''), Public
Law 95-619, 92 Stat. 3258 (1978); the National Appliance Energy
Conservation Act of 1987 (``NAECA 87''), Public Law 100-12, 101
Stat. 103 (1987); and the National Appliance Energy Conservation
Amendments of 1988 (``NAECA 88''), Public Law 100-357, 102 Stat. 671
(1988).
\3\42 U.S.C.A. 6294(a)(2)(C)(i) (West Supp. 1993). Pursuant to
other EPA 92 amendments to EPCA, the Commission also amended the
Rule to require the disclosure of water usage rates for certain
plumbing products. 58 FR 54955 (1993).
\4\58 FR 60147 (1993).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
After evaluating the written comments, the transcript of the
Workshop, and the supplemental comments, the Commission is amending the
rule to impose labeling and other disclosure requirements for the lamp
products referenced in EPA 92. The amendments are discussed in detail
in part IV, below. The amendments appear in ``Text of Amendments,''
below. The Commission also has determined that the final rules
announced today overlap certain provisions of the Commission's pre-
existing Light Bulb Rule pertaining to the required disclosure format
for wattage, light output, and laboratory life ratings and to the
voltage level at which those ratings are to be tested.\5\ Following
this proceeding, the Commission will consider whether any additional
action is necessary concerning the Light Bulb Rule.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\Prior to EPA 92, the Commission issued a rule, known as the
``Light Bulb Rule,'' governing the most common types of incandescent
lamps. Trade Regulation Rule for the Incandescent Lamp (Light Bulb)
Industry, 16 CFR part 409 (1993); see 35 FR 11784 (1970). The
labeling rules announced in this notice duplicate certain
disclosures required by the Light Bulb Rule.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
II. Background
A. Overview of the Appliance Labeling Rule
EPCA, enacted in 1975, is generally designed to promote improved
energy efficiency of consumer products. 42 U.S.C. 6201 (1988). As
amended by EPA 92, it establishes energy consumption standards or water
use standards for certain categories of major home appliances and other
products, 42 U.S.C.A. 6295 (West Supp. 1993), and directs the U.S.
Department of Energy (``DOE'') to prescribe test procedures to measure
the energy consumption or water use of those products. 42 U.S.C.A. 6293
(West Supp. 1993). EPCA also directs the Commission to prescribe, or in
some cases to consider prescribing, rules requiring appliances and
other products to be labeled with disclosures of estimated annual
energy cost, another useful measure of energy usage or efficiency, or
of water use rates. 42 U.S.C.A. 6294 (West Supp. 1993).
Following enactment of EPCA in 1975, the Commission adopted the
Appliance Labeling Rule.\6\ The Rule requires that certain major home
appliances, including furnaces, refrigerators and air conditioners, be
labeled with EnergyGuides.\7\ In addition, the Rule requires
fluorescent lamp ballasts to be labeled or marked with the symbol ``E''
enclosed in a circle, to denote that the ballast meets an energy
efficiency standard established under EPCA.\8\ The Rule, as recently
amended, also requires showerheads, faucets, water closets and urinals
to be marked permanently and/or labeled with certain disclosures about
their water use.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\44 FR 66466 (1979). The Commission has amended the Rule on
several occasions to add labeling requirements for additional
product categories. 52 FR 46888 (1987) (adding a new product
category of central air conditioners and heat pumps and two
additional subcategories of furnaces, pulse combustion furnaces and
condensing furnaces); 54 FR 28031 (1989) (adding a new product
category of fluorescent lamp ballasts); and 58 FR 54955 (1993)
(adding new product categories of showerheads, faucets, water
closets and urinals).
\7\For example, labels for refrigerators, refrigerator-freezers,
freezers, clothes washers, dishwashers, and water heaters must
disclose the estimated annual operating cost (e.g., ``$240.00''). 16
CFR 305.11(a)(5)(i)(E). Labels for room air conditioners, central
air conditioners, heat pumps, and fact sheets for furnaces, by
contrast, must disclose the energy efficiency rating (e.g., ``10.5''
for a central air conditioner or ``96.5'' for a furnace). 16 CFR
305.11(a)(5)(i)(E), 305.11(a)(5)(iii)(C), 305.11(b)(3)(v). In two
separate proceedings, the Commission is considering proposals to
amend the current disclosure requirements for refrigerators,
refrigerator-freezers, freezers, clothes washers, dishwashers, water
heaters and room air conditioners, 53 FR 22106 (1988) and 58 FR
12818 (1993), and to issue labeling rules for pool heaters,
instantaneous water heaters, and heat pump water heaters, 58 FR 7852
(1993).
\8\16 CFR 305.11(d). A fluorescent lamp ballast is a device that
is used to start and operate fluorescent lamps by providing a
starting voltage and current and limiting the current during normal
operations. 16 CFR 305.3(j).
\9\58 FR at 54965-66; to be codified at 16 CFR 305.11(e).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Except for fluorescent lamp ballasts, the Rule requires catalogs
and point-of-sale promotional materials for products covered by the
Rule to contain disclosures of required energy consumption and
efficiency information or water use information.\10\ Further, the Rule
requires, for furnaces, disclosure of energy usage information on fact
sheets, 16 CFR 305.11(b), and, for central air conditioners and heat
pumps, similar disclosures on fact sheets or in industry directories,
16 CFR 305.11(c). For fluorescent lamp ballasts, the Rule requires
catalogs and point-of-sale promotional materials to contain the same
symbol that is required on labels. 16 CFR 305.13(c), 305.14(c).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\10\58 FR at 54964; to be codified at 16 CFR 305.13(a), .14(a)-
(b), (d).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
EPCA authorizes the Commission to assess monetary civil penalties
for violations of the Rule. 42 U.S.C. 6303(a), (d) (1988). The Rule
provides that manufacturers or private labelers who knowingly
distribute products covered by the Rule that are not properly labeled
are subject to a penalty of not more than $100 for each unit. 16 CFR
305.4(a)(1). Manufacturers, distributors, or retailers who knowingly
remove or make illegible a required label similarly are subject to a
penalty of not more than $100 for each unit. 16 CFR 305.4(a)(2).
Manufacturers or private labelers who fail to include required
disclosures in their catalog advertising are subject to a penalty of
not more than $100 per day. 16 CFR 305.4(b)(5). Manufacturers or
private labelers who fail to keep records or provide reports or product
samples as specified by the Rule also are subject to a penalty of not
more than $100 per day. 16 CFR 305.4(b)(2). EPCA also grants to the
U.S. District Courts authority to issue injunctions against such
violations. 42 U.S.C. 6304 (1988).
B. Lamp Labeling Amendments to Appliance Labeling Rule Required by EPA
92 Amendments to EPCA
The EPA 92 amendments to EPCA require that the Commission issue
labeling rules no later than April 25, 1994, for ``general service
fluorescent lamps,'' ``medium base compact fluorescent lamps,'' and
``general service incandescent lamps,'' as those terms are defined in
EPCA. 42 U.S.C.A. 6294(a)(2)(C)(i) (West Supp. 1993). These are the
lamps used in the majority of household and commercial settings. See
Part IV.A.1.-3, below. The lamp labeling rules must require conspicuous
disclosure on the packaging of the lamp of ``such information as the
Commission deems necessary to enable consumers to select the most
energy efficient lamps which meet their requirements.'' Id. The rules
must apply to lamp products manufactured after the twelve month period
beginning on the date of publication of the rule. Id. The Commission
also is requiring disclosures in catalogs from which these lamp
products can be ordered.
C. Requirements of Light Bulb Rule
The Light Bulb Rule covers, with some exceptions, the category of
general service incandescent (nonreflector) lamps.\11\ It does not
cover general service fluorescent lamps, medium base compact
fluorescent lamps, or general service incandescent reflector lamps. The
EPA 92 amendments require the Commission to issue labeling rules for
all of these lamps.\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\11\16 CFR 409.1 n. 3.
\12\Thus, today's amendments apply to: (1) General service
incandescent (reflector and nonreflector) lamps; (2) medium base
(integrally ballasted) compact fluorescent lamps; and (3) general
service fluorescent lamps.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Light Bulb Rule requires that package containers disclose
clearly and conspicuously the enclosed bulb's electrical energy
consumption expressed in average initial wattage, light output
expressed in average initial lumens, and average laboratory life
expressed in hours.\13\ It specifies placement and size of the
disclosures on packages.\14\ It also requires that the disclosures of
the bulb's wattage, light output, and laboratory life be made in
accordance with the requirements of a specific federal purchase
specification, and that the disclosures be based upon ``generally
accepted and approved test methods and procedures.''\15\ Finally, the
Light Bulb Rule prohibits specific claims for these lamp products
unless certain conditions are met.\16\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\13\16 CFR at 409.1(a). If lamps are sold without sleeves or
packaging, or are sold in universal or interchangeable sleeves or
packaging without the information listed above, then all these
disclosures must appear clearly and conspicuously on the lamps
themselves. Id. at 409.1(a)-(b).
\14\Id. at 409.1 n. 4.
\15\Id. at 409.1 n. 1. For multiple filament (``three-way'')
lamps, it requires that wattage and lumen ratings be disclosed for
operation at each level, and that the life rating be based on the
life of the first filament that fails. Because the federal purchase
specification cited in the Light Bulb Rule does not cover multiple
filament lamps, that Rule allows industry members to substantiate
wattage, light output, and laboratory life ratings using tests that
are based upon generally accepted and approved test methods. It
requires disclosure of the specific method used to determine the
life rating, for example, that the lamp is burned on all three
positions equally or that it is based on the life of the major
filament (medium light level) of the lamp. Id.
\16\Id. at 409.1(c)-(d). For example, Sec. 409.1(c) prohibits
representations that savings either in lamp cost or cost of light
will result from the use of certain lamps because of the lamps' life
or light output unless specific factors are taken into account and
clearly and conspicuously disclosed.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Light Bulb Rule remains effective notwithstanding the labeling
rules for lamp products that the Commission now adopts. The Commission
does, however, note two provisions of the Light Bulb Rule that are
different from the lamp labeling rules. The first concerns the format
requirements for disclosing the design wattage, light output and
laboratory life ratings of general service incandescent nonreflector
lamps. The second provision concerns the Light Bulb Rule's requirement
that the testing for, and required disclosures of, wattage, light
output and laboratory life ratings of general service nonreflector
lamps be at the lamp's design voltage. The rules announced today also
prescribe that these required ratings disclosures must be made in a
specified manner and must be based on testing at 120 volts, regardless
of the design voltage. Manufacturers are permitted to provide these
ratings based on the design voltage. Because these different rule
provisions are not contradictory, manufacturers will be able to comply
with both without incurring significant additional costs.\17\ Following
this proceeding, the Commission will decide what further action, if
any, it should take concerning the Light Bulb Rule.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\17\The requirement to provide disclosures at 120 volts on lamps
that have a different design voltage affects a very small segment of
the market. Further, those manufacturers who make 125 or 130 volt
lamps have a market incentive to provide the ratings at their design
voltages whether or not it is required. Furthermore, the various
size specifications set by the Light Bulb Rule only prescribe
minimum sizes for these rating disclosures, which prevents the
disclosures specified by today's rules from becoming too small.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
D. Procedures Used in Rulemaking Proceeding
In the NPR, the Commission invited interested persons to submit by
December 30, 1993, written comments on any issue of fact, law or policy
that might have bearing upon the proposed lamp labeling rules. The
Commission also announced in the NPR that the Commission's staff would
conduct a Workshop, with the assistance of a neutral, third-party
facilitator, to afford Commission staff and interested parties an
opportunity to discuss issues raised in the rulemaking proceeding,
particularly areas of significant controversy or divergent opinions
that were raised in the written comments. The Commission announced that
the discussion during the Workshop would be transcribed and the
transcription would be placed on the public record. The NPR directed
persons interested in participating in the Workshop to notify the
Commission staff by December 15, 1993.18
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\858 FR at 60163.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Workshop was to focus primarily on considering what information
might be ``necessary to enable purchasers to select the most energy
efficient lamps which meet their requirements,'' where the disclosures
should be made, and the manner and layout for making the disclosures.
Participants in the Workshop also were to be afforded an opportunity to
address additional issues raised in the proceeding. The Workshop,
however, was not intended to achieve a consensus among participants or
between participants and Commission staff with respect to any issue
raised in the rulemaking proceeding. The Workshop instead was intended
to elicit information on the basis of which the Commission could
determine how to design the lamp labeling rules.
The Workshop took place at the Federal Trade Commission,
Pennsylvania Avenue and Sixth Street, NW., Washington, DC, on January
19, 1994. With the following exceptions, the proceeding was conducted
as explained in the NPR. First, because of the limited number of
parties who requested to participate in the Workshop, all parties who
timely submitted requests to participate, and timely filed written
comments, were selected. Second, the Commission allowed any interested
party who attended the Workshop to make limited oral presentations.
Third, in response to a petition from the National Electrical
Manufacturers' Association (``NEMA''),19 the Commission extended
the deadline for participants and others who made oral presentations
during the Workshop to submit supplemental written comments from 24
hours to one week following the close of the Workshop.20
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\9Petition dated December 15, 1993, from Mark L. Perlis,
Dickstein, Shapiro & Morin, counsel for NEMA.
\2\0Order dated Dec. 21, 1993, of Lewis R. Parker, Chief Judge,
FTC. See 58 FR at 60164.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
E. Identification of Parties Who Filed Written Comments
The Commission received comments responding to the NPR from
industry members, trade associations, energy and environmental interest
groups, federal and state agencies, utility companies, testing
laboratories, private standards-setting organizations, universities and
other interested parties. The following parties filed written
comments:21 (1) Angelo Brothers Company (``Angelo'') (G-1); (2)
American Council for an Energy-Efficient Economy (``ACEEE'') (GG-1);
(3) Inchcape Testing Services, ETL Testing Laboratories, Inc. (``ETL'')
(GG-2); (4) General Electric Company (``GE'') (G-2); (5) Henry
Gluckstern, Esq. (``Gluckstern'') (GG-3); (6) Green Seal (``Green
Seal'') (GG-4); (7) The Home Depot (``Home Depot'') (GG-5); (8)
Illuminating Engineering Society of North America (``IES'') (GG-6); (9)
Lawrence Berkeley Laboratory (``LBL''), University of California (GG-
7); (10) Massachusetts Office of the Attorney General (``MA AG'') (GG-
8); (11) Minnesota Department of Public Service (``MN DPS'') (GG-9);
(12) Missouri Department of Natural Resources (``MO DNR'') (GG-10);
(13) Dickstein, Shapiro & Morin, on behalf of National Electrical
Manufacturers Association (``NEMA'') (G-3); (14) New England Power
Service (``NEPS'') (GG-11); (15) Northwest Real Group (``NW REAL''), on
behalf of Eugene Water and Electric Board, Grays Harbor Public Utility
District, Idaho Department of Water Resources (Energy Division), Idaho
Power Company, NW Power Planning Council, Oregon Public Utility
Commission, PacifiCorp, Public Power Council, Puget Sound Power and
Light Company, Salem Electric, Seattle City Light, and Snohomish County
Public Utility District # 1 (GG-12); (16) Oregon Department of Energy
(``OR DOE'') (GG-13); (17) Oregon State University (``ORSU'') (GG-14);
(18) Osram Sylvania, Inc. (``Osram'') (G-4); (19) Philips Lighting
Company (``Philips'') (G-5); (20) Lighting Research Center (``LRC''),
Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute (GG-15); (21) Scientific Certification
Systems, Inc. (``SCS'') (GG-16); (22) Supreme Corporation (``Supreme'')
(G-6); (23) U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (``US EPA'') (GG-17);
(24) Washington State Energy Office (``WA SEO'') (GG-18); (25) Hubbell/
Lighting Division (``Hubbell'') (GG-19); (26) Scientific Certification
Systems, Inc. (``SCS'') (GG-20) (revised version of GG-16); (27)
Matsushita Electric Corporation of America (``Panasonic'') (G-7).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\1All public documents are filed in the Commission's File No.
R611004. Staff submissions for the public record are filed in
category ``C. Miscellaneous Staff Materials Assembled After NPR
Filed.'' Industry comments are filed in category ``G. Lamp Products
Proceeding--Industry Comments.'' Other comments are filed in
category ``GG. Lamp Products Proceeding--Comments from Other
Sources.'' Documents are numbered sequentially, such as Document No.
G-1, Document No. G-2. In this notice, comments are cited by an
identification of the commentor, the comment number and the relevant
page number(s), e.g., ``Angelo, G-1, 1-3.'' Supplemental comments
are designated in addition as: ``(Supp.).'' The Workshop transcript
is filed in category ``L. Transcripts of Public Hearings.''
Discussion by more than one party in the transcript is cited by a
reference to the transcript and the relevant page number(s), e.g.,
``Tr., 15-20.'' Discussion by one party in the transcript is cited
by an identification of the party, a reference to the transcript and
the relevant page number(s), e.g., ``Osram (Tr.), 80-81.'' Although
the following comments were submitted shortly after the initial or
supplemental written comment due dates, the Commission has placed
them on the public record and considered them as part of the
rulemaking record of this proceeding: Panasonic, G-7; Hubbell, GG-
19; SCI, GG-20; and MA AG (Supp.), GG-23. One supplemental comment,
NEMA, G-17, was received on March 4. This comment has been placed on
the public record of this proceeding, but is not included as part of
the rulemaking record.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Philips (G-14), Osram (G-15), and GE (G-16) also filed written
comments in response to the separate notice published by the Commission
concerning its request to OMB for approval of the collection of
information burden hours imposed by the proposed lamp labeling rules
under the Paperwork Reduction Act (``PRA'').22
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\258 FR 60652 (1993).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
F. Identification of Parties Who Participated in Workshop and Those Who
Filed Supplemental Written Comments
The following parties were selected as participants and attended
the Workshop:
(1) Steven Nadel, Deputy Director, ACEEE. ACEEE is a nonprofit
research organization that seeks to promote energy efficiency.
(2) Barton Pasternak, Vice President of Corporate Development,
Angelo. Angelo Brothers Company is the largest non-manufacturing seller
and distributor of incandescent light bulbs in the United States.
(3) W. Scott Seeley, Counsel, Gail Cohen, Product Manager for
incandescent and three-way lamps, Russ Churchill, Manager, GE Lighting
Institute, GE. GE is a full-line manufacturer of lamps.
(4) Arthur Weissman, Vice President of Standards and Planning,
Green Seal. Green Seal is a nonprofit environmental organization
involved in labeling and standards-setting. Green Seal recently issued
a standard for compact fluorescent lamps, and has certified several
products under that standard.
(5) Mark Eisen, Manager of Environmental Marketing, Home Depot.
Home Depot is a home center retailer.
(6) Rita Harrold, Director of Educational and Technical
Development, and Ed Robinson, Regional Vice President, IES. IES
disseminates information on the art and science of illumination,
through publications and educational programs.
(7) Barbara Atkinson, LBL. LBL operates an energy analysis program
that provides assistance to the U.S. Department of Energy about federal
policy options and the Energy Policy Act. LBL also conducts research on
lighting technologies.
(8) Bill McAvoy, Assistant Attorney General, MA AG. MA AG works
with utilities such as New England Power regarding conservation
programs.
(9) Mark Perlis, Counsel, NEMA. NEMA is a trade association that
includes manufacturers of lamp products.
(10) Meredith Miller, NEPS. NEPS is a service company for three
retail electric power companies in New England, Rhode Island, and
Massachusetts, and New Hampshire. NEPS provides incentives to
residential customers to encourage compact fluorescent lamp purchases.
(11) Peter Bleasby, Director of Industry Relations and Standards,
Osram. Osram manufactures most types of lamp products.
(12) Al Rousseau, Manager of Technical Relations, Philips. Philips
manufactures most types of lamp products.
(13) Bob Davis, Research Assistant Professor, LRC. LRC conducts an
efficient lighting research and development program.
(14) Bruce Siegal, President, Supreme. Supreme is a small family-
owned lamp manufacturer, specializing in the manufacture of long-life
lamps specifically designed for vibration service and rough surface
applications.
(15) William VonNeida, US EPA. US EPA conducts a ``Green Lights''
program as its flagship voluntary pollution prevention program to
reduce greenhouse gas emissions. In the program, US EPA encourages
businesses, government, and other organizations to use energy-efficient
lighting.
In addition to the participants listed above, Larry Galowin,
Laboratory Accreditation Program, National Voluntary Laboratory
Accreditation Program, National Institute of Standards and Technology
(``NIST''), U.S. Department of Commerce, also attended and made oral
presentations during the Workshop.
The following parties who made oral presentations during the
Workshop also filed supplemental written comments after the Workshop:
ACEEE (GG-21); Angelo (G-8); GE (G-9); LBL (GG-22); NEMA (G-10); Osram
(G-11); Philips (G-12); Supreme (G-13); MA AG (GG-24); and NIST (GG-
23).
III. Disclosures and Other Requirements Proposed in NPR
In informal communications with the Commission's staff during the
period after EPA 92 was enacted and before the Commission published the
NPR, representatives of several industry members and environmental
interest groups suggested various labeling requirements for lamps. Two
of the more specific suggestions were described in the NPR, along with
the Commission's proposals.23
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\358 FR at 60152-60.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
A. NEMA's Proposals
NEMA suggested that the Commission adopt particularized disclosure
requirements for different types of lamp products.24 For general
service fluorescent lamps and incandescent reflector lamps, for which
EPCA establishes energy conservation standards, NEMA suggested
disclosure only of the encircled capital letter ``E,'' similar to the
current requirement for fluorescent lamp ballasts.25 This symbol
would designate that the product meets the established energy
conservation standards. In support of this proposal, NEMA stated that
the performance of all the interchangeable general service fluorescent
lamps that will remain on the market after the energy conservation
standards established by EPA 92 become effective26 will vary only
slightly.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\4NEMA, C-41, C-42.
\2\5See Part II.A, above.
\2\6The effective dates are April 30, 1995, for some lamp
products, and October 31, 1995 for other lamp products. 42 U.S.C.A.
6295(i)(1) (West Supp. 1993).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
NEMA suggested that the designation be indicated in the
manufacturer's catalogs and other printed material, and that the
encircled ``E'' be etched on the product itself, no smaller than the
lamp designation information for wattage. NEMA suggested that, if the
Commission cannot require etching on the product, it should require
that the packing carton containing one or more lamps be marked with the
encircled ``E,'' in color contrasting ink and no smaller than the
manufacturer's name or logo.
For general service incandescent lamps (other than reflector lamps)
and medium base compact fluorescent lamps, NEMA suggested that ``light
output'' (in lumens), watts, life, design volts, and bulb quantity
contents (i.e., number of bulbs in the package) be disclosed according
to specified format requirements on at least one panel of the outer
sleeve of the package. One or more of these items also could be
disclosed on the remaining panels. For general service incandescent
lamps (other than reflector lamps), the term ``lumens,'' in the
specified format, would follow beside or below the numerical value for
light output. For medium base compact fluorescent lamps, the term
``lumens (base-up)'' would be used instead of ``lumens.''27
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\7See note 136, below.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
NEMA also suggested that the labeling rules require an ``energy
efficiency index'' (consisting of ``lumens per watt,'' rounded to the
next highest number, and ``yearly energy cost'' of operating the lamp)
on packages of general service incandescent lamps (other than reflector
lamps) and medium base compact fluorescent lamps.28 The energy
efficiency index would include the disclosure: ``Lumens per watt.'' The
yearly energy cost would include the disclosure: ``At 4 hours per day
at $.10 per kilowatt-hour.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\8The ``energy efficiency index'' would be a square, at least
one inch by one inch, divided in the middle by a horizontal line.
The lumens per watt would appear in the top portion of the square,
and the yearly energy cost in the bottom. The letters and numbers
would be printed in black (or whatever dark color is used in
creating the Universal Product Code symbol). See Illustration 1, 58
FR at 60153.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
NEMA further suggested that, if the manufacturer elects to place
the energy efficiency label on a panel other than the primary display
panel of the package, it should be required to provide an additional
``energy flag'' on the primary display panel. The energy flag would
include only the ``energy index'' value (i.e., lumens per watt).29
The designation ``Energy Index'' would be printed with the energy index
value inside the flag, and a reference to ``See package back'' would be
printed immediately below the flag.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\9The ``energy flag'' would be a right triangle one inch in
height and resting on a perpendicular side one and one-half inches
in length. See Illustration 2, 58 FR at 60154.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
NEMA also suggested that the Commission require that manufacturers
of all lamp products covered by the labeling rules include on the outer
(packing) cases in which the lamps are shipped a label or pre-printed
message stating: ``Product herein tested and labeled in compliance with
the Energy Policy Act of 1992'' or, alternatively, with an approved
symbol. NEMA suggested that the advisory statement be integrated with
or be placed adjacent to the usual case contents label and included
format recommendations.
B. ACEEE's Proposals
ACEEE also submitted specific labeling suggestions for discussion
purposes.30 ACEEE stated that because purchase patterns vary for
residential and commercial purchasers, different labeling approaches
would probably be warranted. It pointed out that commercial purchasers
generally have a greater technical understanding about lamp products,
whereas residential purchasers generally know very little about
lighting and need information that is non-technical and easily
understood. It also noted that residential purchases generally are made
through grocery, hardware, and other retail outlets, where products in
boxes or other packaging are selected by the purchaser off the shelf in
small quantities. ACEEE stated that, in contrast, commercial purchasers
generally order medium to large quantities of lamps from lighting
distributors, using information in catalogs and sales brochures, as
well as information provided orally by sales personnel. These
commercial purchases often are shipped in case quantities, and printed
packages for individual lamps are rare.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\0ACEEE, C-40.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
ACEEE suggested that two types of information appear on labels for
residential purchasers: annual operating cost and relative light
output. It proposed that relative light output be measured by comparing
the lumen output of a product to a reference lamp, with a reference
lamp defined for each common type and wattage of lamp.31 It also
suggested that annual operating cost include both the purchase cost
(manufacturer's suggested list price prorated for an assumed annual
hours of operation) and annual electricity cost (for average operating
hours and electricity cost).32 ACEEE suggested that use of an
annual operating cost metric would allow purchasers to compare products
with different lives and costs.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\1For example, ACEEE suggested a 60 watt standard incandescent
A-lamp as the reference lamp for a 15 watt compact fluorescent lamp.
The relative light output of the compact fluorescent lamp might be
88%, based on average light output.
\3\2ACEEE, C-40, 3, illustrated this as follows: Assuming 1,000
hours per year of operation and $.08 per kilowatt-hour unit
electricity cost, a 15 watt compact fluorescent lamp (with a $20
list price and 10,000 hour rated life) will have an annual operating
cost of $3.20 ([$20/{10,000 hour life/1,000 hours per year} + [15
watts X 1,000 hours per year/1,000 Wh/kWh X $.08 per kilowatt
hour]). In comparison, a standard 60 watt general service
incandescent A-lamp (with a $1.00 list price and 1,000 hour rated
life) will have an annual operating cost of $5.80.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
ACEEE further stated that a lumens-per-watt disclosure probably
should not be used for residential purchasers. ACEEE maintained that
such a disclosure could encourage residential purchasers to buy higher
wattage lamps that have higher lumens-per-watt ratings, when a lower
wattage lamp with a lower lumens-per-watt rating might provide
sufficient light for their needs and cost less to operate at the lower
wattage. For commercial purchasers, on the other hand, ACEEE suggested
that a lumens-per-watt rating probably would be acceptable because
catalog display space is likely to be very limited and commercial
purchasers are more sophisticated.
ACEEE supported disclosure of relevant information on lamp packages
and other point-of-sale materials that provide information on
particular products, such as fact sheets and special displays for
residential sales. For commercial sales, it suggested requiring the
information in catalogs and other sales materials that provide
information on specific products. Finally, ACEEE recommended that the
Commission specify label content and size, but that the Commission
allow manufacturers to develop their own customized designs, consistent
with Commission specifications.
C. Commission's Proposals
1. Disclosure Requirements
Based on the options discussed in the NPR about the kinds of
information purchasers need to select lamp products and the proposals
suggested by interested parties (as summarized above), the Commission
proposed requiring disclosure of two types of information for lamp
products covered by the labeling rules. One category included basic
performance information (such as light output, which is needed to
select lamp products that meet purchasers' requirements), and the other
category included various supplemental disclosures designed to further
facilitate selection of the most energy efficient lamp. Each category
is discussed below.
a. Basic disclosures. The Commission proposed requiring that lamp
package labels and catalogs conspicuously disclose the following
information: (1) Lumens (whether identified by that term, or another
such as ``brightness'' or ``light output''); (2) watts; (3) design
volts (if other than 120 volts); (4) average life (in hours); and (5)
number of items in the package.33 For multiple filament (``three-
way'') general service incandescent lamps, the Commission proposed
requiring that lumens, watts, and design volts be disclosed for
operation at each level, and that the life rating be based on the life
of the first filament that fails. Finally, the Commission proposed that
the following statement appear on package labels and in catalogs from
which the lamps could be ordered: ``More efficient lamps may have a
higher purchase price, but may cost you less overall.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\358 FR at 60154-56.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
b. Supplemental disclosures. The Commission proposed requiring, for
all lamps to be covered by the labeling rules, that package labels and
catalogs from which the lamps may be ordered also make a supplemental
disclosure. The Commission proposed two alternatives for primary
consideration: (1) A lumens-per-watt disclosure; or, (2) a disclosure
of the estimated energy cost of the lamp based on a specified unit
energy cost and use period.
The NPR explained that a lumens-per-watt disclosure (i.e., the
``Energy Index'' that had been suggested by NEMA) has the advantage of
simplicity. But, as ACEEE noted, such a disclosure could lead to lumen
over-purchasing because higher wattage bulbs often produce
disproportionately more lumens and thus often have a better energy
index although they use more energy. The Commission stated that this
drawback possibly could be avoided if the Commission required a
disclosure such as: ``Select the light output you require before
comparing the energy index of different bulbs.''
Alternatively, the Commission stated that it might require a
disclosure of the estimated monetary cost of the energy used by the
lamp, based on use for a specified usage period, such as a normal
average life in hours of a lamp or a length of time based on average
usage patterns. The advantage of an operating cost disclosure is that
it would reduce to monetary terms the energy cost of a lamp product. At
the same time, the Commission stated that it would consider carefully
whether such disclosures effectively communicate the extent to which a
higher initial bulb cost can be compensated for by lower operating
costs over the bulb's life.34
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\4See notes 106, 108, below.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Commission indicated that, although average or estimated usage
patterns (e.g., one year) could be used in a monetary cost of operation
disclosure, there are no established usage patterns and estimated use
will vary depending upon the location of the lamp. In addition, the
Commission noted that it would have to determine what unit cost for
electricity to use. The Commission explained that, to prevent possible
confusion, it might be appropriate to require disclosure of how the
estimated energy cost was determined.35 The Commission recognized,
however, that additional information could unduly complicate the label
and not be useful.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\5Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Because some purchasers may be interested in computing lamp costs
comprehensively, including consideration of the initial purchase price
and replacement cost, the Commission also proposed requiring that
information be provided to purchasers to enable them to determine the
``estimated total operating cost'' of the lamp for a standard time
period. But, recognizing that purchasers desiring such information
would need to make calculations for each bulb they were considering,
the Commission stated that it would consider carefully the extent to
which consumers actually would use the proposed disclosures in making a
purchase decision. The Commission noted that, as a practical matter,
consumers may disregard, or consider too complex, any disclosure
requiring computations of this sort, and that any such required
disclosures, therefore, may not be useful to consumers in their efforts
to choose an energy efficient bulb.
2. Where Disclosures Should Be Made
In the NPR, the Commission explained that residential purchasers
normally buy lamp products through retail outlets, such as hardware,
home center, and grocery stores. Residential purchasers, therefore,
normally have the opportunity to examine lamp product packaging prior
to purchase. The disclosures proposed for packaged product labels would
provide residential purchasers with the information they need to select
the most energy efficient lamps that meet their requirements.
According to industry representatives, however, some products, such
as general service fluorescent lamps, frequently are shipped without
individual lamp sleeves or packaging other than the bulk shipping case,
whether the shipment is to a commercial purchaser (who purchases
through a catalog) or to a local retail store for resale of unpackaged
individual lamps to residential purchasers. For these products, the
Commission suggested two options. Option One would require the basic
and supplemental disclosures (except for the number of items in each
package) on an adhesive, hang tag, or similar type of label, attached
to each unpackaged product. Option Two would require the manufacturer
to include, with each bulk shipping case, statements disclosing all the
required information for the enclosed products (except for the number
of items in each package). Option Two also would require the retailer
to post those statements conspicuously at the point of sale in
immediate proximity to the sales floor display of the lamp product.
Some sellers also sell lamp products to residential purchasers and
commercial purchasers through catalogs. These purchasers will not see
the disclosures on the product's packaging until the product is
delivered, and may rely primarily (or solely) on information in the
catalogs from which the lamps are ordered. For these purchasers, the
catalog serves the same informational function as a package does for a
retail purchaser. The Commission, therefore, proposed that the basic as
well as the supplemental disclosures be made both on package labels and
in catalogs each time each different lamp product is listed for sale.
3. Format of Disclosures
The Commission explained in the NPR that it could specify that
required disclosures be made through use of a flexible standard that
requires ``clear and conspicuous'' disclosures. Under this
``performance'' standard, complying firms would be free to design
disclosures as they wish in response to market considerations, as long
as the disclosures were clear and conspicuous. The Commission stated
that, alternatively, it could require that the disclosures comply with
a design format specified by the Commission.
The Commission indicated that, in choosing a format standard, it
would be guided by the need to direct the purchaser's attention to the
information that is most important, and the need for the information to
be organized so it could be easily understood and acted upon. For
example, the Commission stated that it would consider requiring that
those items deemed most important to purchasers be featured on the
front panel of a package label, perhaps within a graphic box, while
permitting other disclosures to be placed elsewhere.
4. Substantiation and Sampling Requirements
In the NPR, the Commission proposed requiring that manufacturers
follow testing and test specimen sampling procedures to be specified in
the final labeling rules to substantiate all disclosures they must make
on labels, catalogs and point-of-sale written materials. The Commission
stated that when DOE issues testing and sampling procedures for general
service fluorescent lamps and general service incandescent reflector
lamps, or for any additional lamp products, the Commission would
consider whether to adopt the DOE procedures as the required
substantiation under the labeling rules.36 The Commission
solicited comments about current industry testing and sampling
procedures, such as those issued by IES and the American National
Standards Institute (``ANSI''), that would be adequate in the interim
to substantiate the disclosures it proposed.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\6EPA 92 amended EPCA to establish minimum energy efficiency
standards for general service fluorescent lamps and incandescent
(reflector) lamps. 42 U.S.C.A. 6295(i) (West Supp. 1993). The
amendments require DOE to issue specific testing procedures for
these lamp products. 42 U.S.C. 6293(b)(6) (West Supp. 1993). EPCA
does not establish energy conservation standards or require DOE to
issue test procedures for medium base compact fluorescent lamps or
general service incandescent lamps (other than incandescent
(reflector) lamps). However, DOE has authority to issue test
procedures for categories of products that are not specified in
EPCA, 42 U.S.C. 6292(b), 6393(b)(1)(B) (1988), and to set minimum
efficiency standards for those products, 42 U.S.C.A. 6295(l) (West
Supp. 1993).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
To enable the Commission to determine whether required disclosures
are accurate, the NPR also proposed requiring that manufacturers, upon
request by the Commission, submit, at the manufacturer's expense, a
reasonable number of products to any laboratory designated by the
Commission. Any charge levied by the laboratory for testing, however,
would be paid for by the Commission.37
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\7Based on EPCA, 42 U.S.C. 6296(b)(3) (1988), the Appliance
Labeling Rule, 16 CFR 305.16, applies this requirement to other
products.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
5. Recordkeeping and Reporting Requirements
The Commission proposed requiring that manufacturers of all covered
lamp products maintain records to substantiate each item that the final
rules required to be disclosed, and proposed requiring manufacturers to
submit those records to the Commission within 30 days of a request. The
Commission also proposed requiring that lamp manufacturers submit
annual reports on or before March 1 each year. As proposed, the yearly
reporting requirement would not become effective until after DOE issues
test procedures for specific lamp products covered by the labeling
rules. The Commission stated that it would publish a notice after DOE
had issued test procedures, announcing when the initial reports would
be due.
The Commission proposed requiring that each report contain the same
type of information that currently is required for other categories of
products covered by the Appliance Labeling Rule. To minimize the
burdens imposed by this reporting requirement, the Commission proposed
accepting trade association directories and similar submissions in lieu
of individual annual reports, as it does for other product categories.
6. Other Matters
The Commission proposed amending Sec. 305.1 of the Appliance
Labeling Rule, 16 CFR 305.1, which summarizes the Rule's coverage, to
include a description of the disclosures proposed for labels and
catalogs. The Commission also proposed amending Sec. 305.2 of the Rule,
16 CFR 305.2, which contains definitions of words used in EPCA, to
include definitions for additional words to be used in the Rule, based
on definitions in EPCA, as amended by EPA 92, 42 U.S.C.A. 6291(30)
(West Supp. 1993).
IV. Analysis of Disclosures and Other Requirements Adopted by the
Commission
The Commission received information from the public relating to
this rulemaking proceeding from three sources: written comments filed
in response to the NPR, testimony during the Workshop, and supplemental
written comments following the Workshop. The discussion below includes
information from all three sources, as well as documents placed on the
public record by the Commission's staff during the rulemaking
proceeding.
In some cases, participants in the proceeding modified their
position on one or more of the issues as the rulemaking progressed. In
instances in which the commentor's position on a particular issue
changed, the Commission has taken the commentor's most recent comments
as its final position on that issue. Similarly, whenever the Commission
refers to a commentor's position on a particular issue, if it has
changed since its original formulation, the Commission notes that
change.
A. Lamp Products Covered by Labeling Rules
EPCA specifically defines the lamp products that are covered by the
Commission's lamp labeling rules. Under EPCA, as amended by EPA 92, the
Commission's labeling rules apply only to ``general service fluorescent
lamps,'' ``medium base compact fluorescent lamps,'' and ``general
service incandescent lamps.'' 42 U.S.C.A. 6294(a)(2)(c)(i) (West Supp.
1993). These lamp products are described in more detail below.
1. General Service Fluorescent Lamps
The term ``fluorescent lamp'' means a lamp containing a low
pressure mercury electric-discharge source in which a fluorescing
coating transforms some of the ultra-violet energy generated by the
mercury discharge into light. 42 U.S.C.A. 6291(30)(A) (West Supp.
1993). EPCA includes only the following fluorescent lamps:
(i) Any straight-shaped lamp (commonly referred to as 4-foot
medium bi-pin lamps) with medium bi-pin bases of nominal overall
length of 48 inches and rated wattage of 28 or more.
(ii) Any U-shaped lamp (commonly referred to as 2-foot U-shaped
lamps) with medium bi-pin bases of nominal overall length between 22
and 25 inches and rated wattage of 28 or more.
(iii) Any rapid start lamp (commonly referred to as 8-foot high
output lamps) with recessed double contact bases of nominal overall
length of 96 inches and 0.800 nominal amperes, as defined in ANSI
C78.1-1978 and related supplements.
(iv) Any instant start lamp (commonly referred to as 8-foot
slimline lamps) with single pin bases of nominal overall length of
96 inches and rated wattage of 52 or more, as defined in ANSI C78.3-
1978 (R1984) and related supplement ANSI C78.3a-1985.
42 U.S.C.A. 6291(30)(A)(i)-(iv) (West Supp. 1993).
The term ``general service fluorescent lamp'' means fluorescent
lamps that can be used to satisfy the majority of fluorescent
applications. 42 U.S.C.A. 6291(30)(B) (West Supp. 1993). The definition
specifically excludes fluorescent lamps designed and marketed for
specific lighting applications.38
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\8The exclusions are: (i) Fluorescent lamps designed to
promote plant growth; (ii) fluorescent lamps specifically designed
for cold temperature installations; (iii) colored fluorescent lamps;
(iv) impact-resistant fluorescent lamps; (v) reflectorized or
aperture fluorescent lamps; (vi) fluorescent lamps designed for use
in reprographic equipment; (vii) fluorescent lamps primarily
designed to produce radiation in the ultra-violet region of the
spectrum; and (viii) fluorescent lamps with a color rendering index
of 82 or greater. 42 U.S.C.A. 6291(30)(B)(i)-(viii) (West Supp.
1993).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
2. General Service Incandescent Lamps
The term ``incandescent lamp'' means a lamp in which light is
produced by a filament heated to incandescence by an electric current.
42 U.S.C.A. 6291(30)(C) (West Supp. 1993). The definition includes only
the following incandescent lamps:
(i) Any lamp (commonly referred to as lower wattage nonreflector
general service lamps, including any tungsten-halogen lamp) that has
a rated wattage between 30 and 199 watts, has an E26 medium screw
base, has a rated voltage or voltage range that lies at least
partially within 115 and 130 volts, and is not a reflector lamp.
(ii) Any lamp (commonly referred to as a reflector lamp) which
is not colored or designed for rough or vibration service
applications, that contains an inner reflective coating on the outer
bulb to direct the light, an R, PAR, or similar bulb shapes
(excluding ER or BR) with E26 medium screw bases, a rated voltage or
voltage range that lies at least partially within 115 and 130 volts,
a diameter which exceeds 2.75 inches, and is either--
(I) A low(er) wattage reflector lamp which has a rated wattage
between 40 and 205 watts; or
(II) A high(er) wattage reflector lamp which has a rated wattage
above 205 watts.
(iii) Any general service incandescent lamp (commonly referred
to as a high- or higher-wattage lamp) that has a rated wattage above
199 watts (above 205 watts for a high wattage reflector lamp).
42 U.S.C.A. 6291(30)(C)(i)-(iii) (West Supp. 1993).
The term ``general service incandescent lamp'' means any
incandescent lamp (other than a miniature or photographic lamp) that
has an E26 medium screw base, a rated voltage range at least partially
within 115 and 130 volts, and which can be used to satisfy the majority
of lighting applications. 42 U.S.C.A. 6291(30)(D) (West Supp. 1993).
The definition specifically excludes incandescent lamps designed and
marketed for specific lighting applications.39 Included within the
category of ``general service incandescent lamps'' are incandescent
reflector lamps. The term ``incandescent reflector lamp'' means a lamp
described in item (ii), above. 42 U.S.C.A. 6291(30)(F) (West Supp.
1993).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\9EPCA excludes any ``general service incandescent lamp''
specifically designed for: (i) Traffic signal, or street lighting
service; (ii) airway, airport, aircraft, or other aviation service;
(iii) marine or marine signal service; (iv) photo, projection, sound
reproduction, or film viewer service; (v) stage, studio, or
television service; (vi) mill, saw mill, or other industrial process
service; (vii) mine service; (viii) headlight, locomotive, street
railway, or other transportation service; (ix) heating service; (x)
code beacon, marine signal, lighthouse, reprographic, or other
communication service; (xi) medical or dental service; (xii)
microscope, map, microfilm, or other specialized equipment service;
(xiii) swimming pool or other underwater service; (xiv) decorative
or showcase service; (xv) producing colored light; (xvi) shatter
resistance which has an external protective coating; or (xvii)
appliance service. 42 U.S.C.A. 6291(30)(D)(i)-(xvii) (West Supp.
1993).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
3. Medium Base Compact Fluorescent Lamps
The term ``medium base compact fluorescent lamp'' means an
integrally ballasted fluorescent lamp with a medium screw base and a
rated input voltage of 115 to 130 volts and which is designed as a
direct replacement for a general service incandescent lamp. 42 U.S.C.A.
6291(30)(S) (West Supp. 1993). Thus, the definition does not include
other types of compact fluorescent lamps that operate with a separate
ballast, even if the lamp or the separate ballast has a medium screw
base.
B. Disclosures for Lamps Generally
Several comments stated that the main purpose of energy labeling
for lamps is to encourage purchasers to move towards the purchase of
more energy efficient lighting like compact fluorescent lamps.40
The potential for energy savings through the use of more efficient
lighting is high, particularly in commercial settings where lighting is
the single largest source of electricity consumption. About 41 percent
of electricity, and 28 percent of total energy, consumed in the
commercial sector is for lighting.41 Fluorescent lamps consume
about 55 percent of lighting electricity in the commercial
sector,42 with incandescent reflector lamps consuming most of the
remainder. In the residential sector, energy use for lighting is small,
though not trivial, representing about seven percent of residential
energy use.43 Incandescent lamps provide most lighting in
residences.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\0See, e.g., NEMA, G-3, 35; Gluckstern, GG-3, 1.
\4\1U.S. Congress, Office of Technology Assessment, Building
Energy Efficiency (hereinafter referred to as ``OTA Report''), OTA-
E-518 (Washington, DC; U.S. Government Printing Office, May 1992),
C-6, 50. Commercial buildings used 12.9 quads of energy at a cost of
$68 billion in 1989. About two-thirds of this energy was in the form
of electricity. In addition to lighting, space heating and space
cooling were the other principal end uses. Id. at 21.
\4\2Id. at 54.
\4\3Id. at 50-51.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
General service fluorescent lamps provide lighting through a system
known as a luminaire. Under EPCA, the term ``luminaire'' means a
complete lighting unit consisting of a fluorescent lamp or lamps,
together with parts designed to distribute the light, to position and
protect the lamps, and to connect the lamps to the power supply through
a ballast. 42 U.S.C.A. 6291(29)(F) (West Supp. 1993). Compact
fluorescent lamps also provide lighting through a system. For compact
fluorescent lamps, the system includes the fluorescent lamp and a
ballast. Some compact fluorescent lamps are sold for use with separate
ballasts. The lamp labeling rules, however, cover only those defined as
medium base compact fluorescent lamps, i.e., those that have an
integral ballast and medium screw base. Incandescent lamps also have
medium screw bases. They provide lighting by heating an internal
filament to incandescence by an electric current, and can be used, for
example, in table or floor lamp fixtures or in ceiling or wall
fixtures. Medium base (integrally ballasted) compact fluorescent lamps
are meant for use as replacements for incandescent lamps in these
applications.
Increasing the efficiency of a lighting system that currently uses
incandescent lamps can be accomplished by selecting a more efficient
incandescent lamp, such as a more efficient halogen incandescent lamp,
or a more efficient medium base compact fluorescent lamp. To the extent
the efficiency of general service fluorescent lighting systems can be
increased, it can be accomplished by increasing the efficiency of the
lamp, the ballast or the luminaire, or a combination of those separate
parts. In designing the disclosure requirements for these different
lamp types, therefore, the Commission has considered the effect of the
minimum energy efficiency standards specified by EPCA on the lamps that
will remain on the market after the standards become effective, and how
best to provide purchasers with the information necessary for them to
select the most efficient lamps that meet their requirements.
Several comments stated generally that any labeling requirements
for lamps should meet one or more of the following standards: Simple,
uniform, comprehensible, cost-effective and based on readily available
information.44 In response to a question in the NPR, some comments
favored different types of disclosures based on the category of
purchaser--residential or commercial. One comment, however,
specifically stated that the disclosures should be the same for both
categories.45 Most industry members supported a ``bifurcated''
approach to labeling (discussed in detail below), with a requirement
for detailed disclosures of performance characteristics on packaging
for general service incandescent lamps and compact fluorescent lamps
and a requirement for disclosure of only an encircled ``E'' on
packaging for general service incandescent reflector lamps and general
service fluorescent lamps.46 Several other comments, however,
favored requiring the same detailed disclosures of performance
characteristics on the packaging of all the lamp types covered by the
labeling rules.47
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\4GE, G-2, 4-5, (Tr.), 106; NEMA, G-3, 10-11; Osram, G-4, 2;
IES (Tr.), 62; MN DPS, GG-9, 1; OR DOE, GG-13, 1.
\4\5See 58 FR at 60158. Comments favoring different types of
disclosures: ACEEE, GG-1, 1; IES, GG-6, 1-2; OR DOE, GG-13, 2; WA
SEO, GG-18, 3. Specifically recommending identical disclosures for
both types: MN DPS, GG-9, 1.
\4\6See, e.g., NEMA, G-3; Osram, G-4; Philips, G-5; GE, G-2.
\4\7See, e.g., Angelo, G-1; ACEEE GG-1; LBL, GG-7; MN DPS, GG-9;
WA SEO, GG-18.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Two of the three categories of lamps covered by the labeling rules
have medium size, screw-in bases that fit into standard screw-in lamp
receptacles.48 These are: General service incandescent (reflector
and nonreflector) lamps, and medium base compact fluorescent lamps. The
method of connection to the power source is the same for these types of
lamps, and the Commission is prescribing similar labeling requirements
for them. The Commission discusses the comments on the proposals for
general service incandescent (nonreflector) lamps and medium base
compact fluorescent lamps and the labeling rule requirements for them
together in Part IV.C, below. The Commission discusses the comments on,
and the requirements for, general service incandescent reflector lamps
in Part IV.D, below. The comments and final requirements respecting the
fourth type of lamp--general service fluorescent lamps--are described
in Part IV.E, below.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\8The third category, general service fluorescent lamps, are
not screwed into lamp receptacles, but have prongs at either end of
the lamp tube or receptacles for prongs that are at either end of
the lamp fixture.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
C. Disclosures for Medium Base General Service Incandescent
(Nonreflector) Lamps and Compact Fluorescent Lamps
Virtually all the comments recommended that the Commission require
some version of the basic disclosures that the Commission proposed in
the NPR for both general service incandescent (nonreflector) lamps and
medium base compact fluorescent lamps.49 The disclosures the
Commission is requiring, each of which is discussed separately below,
are: design voltage (if other than 120 volts), energy used (in terms of
watts), light output (in average initial lumens), average laboratory
life (in hours), number of items in the package (if more than one), and
a supplemental disclosure, consisting of an advisory statement.50
Because the comments usually discussed recommendations regarding the
disclosures for these two types of medium screwbase lamps together, and
because these lamps are generally interchangeable, the Commission
discusses the comments and the final disclosure requirements for these
types of medium screw base lamps together in this section.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\958 FR at 60154-55.
\5\0See 16 CFR 305.11(e), 305.14(d) in Text of Amendments,
below. For descriptions of the items recommended for required
disclosures, see, in particular, Angelo, G-1, 2; GE, G-2, 7, (Ans.),
1; NEMA, G-3, 39, (Supp.), G-10, 10-12; Osram, G-4, 2, (Supp.), G-
11, 1-2; Philips, G-5, 1-2, (Supp.), G-12, 1; Panasonic, G-7, 2;
ACEEE, GG-1, 1; OR DOE, GG-13, 7-8; LRC, GG-15, 2; WA SEO, GG-18, 1-
2.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
A few comments recommended that required labeling for compact
fluorescent lamps include additional information, such as the lamp's
incandescent wattage equivalency, color and temperature ratings, noise
and interference factors, and whether the lumen output of the lamp is
substantially different in a base-up or base-down installation.51
The Commission discusses these issues in Part IV.C.4, below.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\1See, e.g., NW REAL, GG-12, 1; OR DOE, GG-13, 2-7, 7-8; ORSU,
GG-14, 2-3; LRC, GG-15, 1-2; MA AG (Supp.), GG-24, 2; Philips
(Supp.), G-12, 1; ACEEE (Supp.), GG-21, 3. See also note 136, below.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. Basic Disclosures
a. Voltage. Voltage refers to the electromotive force of
electricity.52 In the residential market, the voltage provided by
electric utilities in this country for lighting purposes is primarily
120 volts,53 but may range from approximately 115 to 125
volts.54 Voltage is not a characteristic of a lamp product, but
the operation of a lamp is affected by the voltage at which it
operates. For a given lamp, the higher the voltage, the higher the
light output in lumens, the higher the wattage, and the shorter the
life.55 In the NPR, the Commission proposed requiring that
manufacturers disclose voltage on packaging only if the product's
``design voltage,'' i.e., the voltage at which the lamp was designed to
operate, is other than 120 volts.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\2The term ``volt'' (a unit of potential difference and of
electromotive force) is defined as the difference of electric
potential between two points of a conducting wire carrying a
constant current of one ampere, when the power dissipated between
those points is equal to one watt. U.S. Department of Commerce,
National Institute of Standards and Technology, ``The International
System of Units (SI),'' NIST Special Publication 330 (1991 edition),
August 1991 (hereinafter cited as ``NIST Publication 330''), at 19.
\5\3NEPS (Tr.), 37 (for residential consumers, voltage provided
by utilities for lighting is predominately 120 volts); ACEEE (Tr.),
38 (120 volts is normal for vast majority of homes); IES (Tr.), 62
(same). Utility companies in some parts of the country, however,
such as the Northwest, provide other voltages such as 125 volts, and
manufacturers ship lamps with those design voltages to those areas.
Osram (Tr.), 51-52 (ships 125-volt lamps to Northwest, which has
slightly higher line voltage); GE (Tr.), 60 (Northwest/TVA is 125
volts); Osram (Tr.), 64 (ships 125-volt lamps to Seattle and TVA).
In recognition of the predominant demand for lamps that operate at
120 volts, manufacturers design most incandescent lamps for
operation at that voltage. GE (Tr.), 37-38 (90% or more). See also
Osram (Tr.), 64-65 (no more than 10% of its incandescent lamps have
125 design voltage).
\5\4Even within a given locality, the voltage may vary by plus
or minus five percent. NEPS (Tr.), 37.
\5\5See, e.g., GE (Tr.), 35.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
During the proceeding, commentors explained that lamps produced for
use in this country fall into three basic categories, based on their
design voltage. The vast majority of lamps have a design voltage of
(i.e., are manufactured to operate at) 120 volts.56 A minority of
lamps are produced with a different design voltage because they are
intended for use in limited areas of the country, such as the
Northwest, in which the line voltage is 125.57 The last category
includes lamps with a design voltage of 130. These lamps typically are
produced with a heavier filament and have longer lives when used at 120
volts (though providing less light) than competing lamps with design
voltages of 120 volts. They are generally sold as ``long-life''
products58 and are marketed throughout the country, regardless of
the line voltage in the particular area.59
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\6See note 53, above.
\5\7Id.
\5\8See GE (Tr.), 35-36; Supreme (Tr.), 39.
\5\9See, e.g., ACEEE (Tr.), 202.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Commission's Light Bulb Rule currently requires manufacturers
to disclose watts, light output in lumens and average laboratory life
in hours for incandescent lamps, based on operation at the lamp's
stated design voltage.60 EPCA, as amended by EPA 92, on the other
hand, states that: ``Labeling information for incandescent lamps shall
be based on performance at 120 volts input, regardless of the rated
lamp voltage.'' 42 U.S.C.A. 6294(a)(2((C)(i) (West Supp. 1993).61
The statutory language and the comments received raise two issues that
the labeling rules must address concerning voltage. First, should the
rules require that the design voltage always be disclosed, or that the
design voltage be disclosed only if it is other than 120 volts? Second,
what labeling information (i.e., which disclosures) must be based on
tests conducted at 120 volts (regardless of the design voltage)?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\016 CFR 409.1 n. 1.
\6\1Neither the EPA 92 amendments to EPCA nor the legislative
history of the EPA 92 amendments define more specifically the
labeling disclosures for incandescent lamps that must be based on
operation at 120 volts.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Virtually all the comments that discussed voltage agreed that it is
an important element that affects operation of lamp products. Several
comments agreed with the Commission's proposal to require that voltage
be disclosed if the design voltage of the product (the voltage at which
the product was designed by the manufacturer to operate) is other than
120.62 None suggested that disclosure of voltage in labeling is
necessary for lamps with a design voltage of 120.63
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\2See, e.g., NEMA (Supp), G-10, 10-11; ACEEE (Tr.), 38; Osram
(Supp.), G-11, 1; Philips (Supp.), G-12, 1.
\6\3See, e.g., ACEEE, GG-1, 1.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The issue of the voltage at which the required disclosures of
watts, light output, life and energy efficiency should be based was the
subject of considerable discussion during the Workshop.64 Several
industry representatives supported requiring disclosure of wattage,
light output in lumens, and average laboratory life based on operation
of the lamp at its design voltage, if the design voltage is other than
120.65 They suggested that only the energy index (i.e., lumens per
watt) should be disclosed at 120 volts regardless of the lamp's design
voltage. They argued that only the efficiency measure is covered by the
requirement in EPCA that labeling disclosures for incandescent lamps be
measured at 120 volts.66 Other commentors contended, however, that
for general service incandescent lamps the labeling rules should
require that wattage, light output, life and energy index disclosures
be made at 120 volts because most purchasers operate lamps at 120 volts
and performance claims should be based on a uniform standard.67
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\4See Tr., 35-65. The discussion of this issue throughout the
comments and Workshop transcript usually was directed specifically
at general service incandescent lamps. In some instances, it was
unclear whether the comments were meant to apply also to other lamp
types. But, there are no references to this issue specifically
pertaining to compact fluorescent lamps.
\6\5NEMA (Tr.), 39-40, 54, (Supp.), G-10, 19-21 (the Commission
views these statements as NEMA's final position on the issue); Osram
(Tr.), 41, (Supp.), G-11, 2. See also Angelo, G-1, 2 (but note that
Angelo later recommends disclosures at 120 volts in the Workshop at
Tr. 57); GE, G-2, 7, (Ans.), 1; Osram (Tr.), 41, 58-59, (Supp.), G-
11, 2; ACEEE, GG-1, 1 (ACEEE, too, later recommends in the Workshop
that all disclosures be at 120 volts, (Tr.), 59); OR DOE, GG-13, 7;
WA SEO, GG-18, 1.
\6\6In its supplemental comment, NEMA stated:
A question was raised at the Workshop as to whether the last
sentence of section (sic) (324(a)(2)(C)(i) of EPCA) should be
interpreted to apply only to energy efficiency labeling or to all
items required to be disclosed under the Commission's regulations.
There is no published legislative history interpreting this
provision. However, NEMA representatives were involved in extensive
discussions with energy efficiency organizations and congressional
staff over the language of the Energy Policy Act. Throughout those
discussions, everyone's attention was focused on how best to educate
consumers to select the most energy efficient lamp. NEMA
representatives sought inclusion of the requirement that all lamps'
efficiency ratings be based on a comparable operation at 120 volts.
NEMA's objective was to prevent some manufacturers or importers from
disguising low efficiency lamps by claiming efficiency ratings at
voltages greater than 120 volts. NEMA was concerned that if a
consumer faced 120 and 130 volt lamps in the same store, it be clear
that the 130 volt lamp would be substantially less efficient when
operated at 120 volts (Tr. 40-41). NEMA did not intend to force
manufacturers to cease production or alter existing ratings of
higher voltage lamps for use in niche markets. Thus, in construing
section (sic) (324(a)(2)(C)(i)) of EPCA, NEMA urges that the
provision be fairly read in the context of the legislative
discussions and that congressional intent is best served by
requiring that only lumens per watt measurements be based on 120
volts operation.
NEMA (Supp.), G-10, 20-21. See also GE (Supp.), G-9, Ex. 4;
Osram (Tr.), 51-52 (most purchasers do not see mix of products based
on different voltages on store shelves, but purpose of the statute's
requirement was to require efficiency be based on constant voltage
for situations when mix of products were on shelves at same time).
But see NEMA, G-3, 45 (``Section 324(a)((2))(C)(i) of EPCA requires
that labeling information for incandescent lamps be based on
performance when operated at 120 volts input, regardless of the
rated lamp voltage. The Commission's regulations should expressly
require manufacturers of incandescent lamps to disclose all
performance characteristics when operated at 120 volts, regardless
of the rated voltage.'').
\6\7See MN DPS, GG-9, 2; NEPS (Tr.), 44; LRC (Tr.), 44, 54-55;
Angelo (Tr.), 57; ACEEE (Tr.), 59; IES (Tr.), 62.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Commission has determined that the final labeling rules should
require that all the specified disclosures be based on operation at 120
volts, but that it should not require disclosure of voltage unless the
design voltage is other than 120, since all required lamp disclosures
will be based on a uniform voltage.68 For the vast majority of
purchasers in the country, lamps will be operated at 120 volts,
regardless of the design voltage designated by the lamp manufacturer.
For these purchasers, who represent 90% or more of the market for these
lamps in the U.S., therefore, disclosures of the lamp's performance in
watts, lumens, life and energy efficiency at a different voltage, such
as 125 or 130 volts, would misrepresent the performance they receive in
actual use.69 The Commission realizes that, for those purchasers
whose line voltage is other than 120 volts, disclosure of these
performance characteristics at 120 volts will not represent the lamp
performance they will experience. These purchasers, however, represent
a small minority in the marketplace. For lamps with a design voltage of
130, but expected to be operated at 120 volts, the disclosures will be
accurate.70
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\8See 16 CFR 305.11(e)(1)(C) in Text of Amendments, below. If
a lamp's design voltage is other than 120 volts, the lamp's required
disclosures of wattage, light output, and life must each be followed
by the phrase ``at 120 volts.'' Manufacturers of such lamps may also
disclose the lamps' wattage, light output and life at the design
voltage. In such cases, the disclosures of wattage, light output,
and life must each be followed by a phrase indicating the voltage at
which the additional disclosures were measured, e.g., ``at 125
volts.''
\6\9See note 53, above.
\7\0See Angelo (Tr.), 63:
(P)eople may choose life or lumen output but if it's tested at
120 then there's no reason to go through the deception of saying
it's a 130-volt lamp. It's simply enough to say that this lamp is
going to produce less lumens[,] meaning it's going to have a
different filament and it has really nothing to do with design
wattage, it has to do with life and lumens. So in the circumstance
of the people who were buying it for that reason, why go through a
deception? Why not just tell them [it's] at 120 and let it be billed
as a 120-volt lamp with less lumens and more life?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The final rules, therefore, require that the disclosures of watts,
lumens, and hours of life be based on operation of the lamp at 120
volts. Because medium base compact fluorescent lamps compete directly
with incandescent lamps, purchasers often will compare these different
lamp types when making purchasing decisions. Therefore, the Commission
also is requiring that the performance disclosures for medium base
compact fluorescent lamps be based on operation at 120 volts.
The labeling rules, however, allow manufacturers who distribute
lamps with different design voltages to provide additional information
based on the design voltage of the lamps when operated under those
other voltages. Because the Commission is allowing manufacturers to
provide additional information to purchasers whose line voltage varies
from 120 volts, there is no reason to believe that manufacturers will
cease production of lamps designed to operate at different voltages, as
NEMA speculated.71 See Secs. 305.11(e)(1)(A)(ii) and
305.11(e)(1)(C) in ``Text of Amendments,'' below.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\1NEMA (Supp.), G-10, 21.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
b. Wattage. Watt ratings on lamps refer to the unit of electrical
power that the lamp will consume.72 In the NPR, the Commission
proposed requiring that watts be disclosed. There was no disagreement
during the proceeding regarding the need for or appropriateness of
requiring disclosure of wattage on labels for general service
incandescent (nonreflector) lamps and compact fluorescent lamps.73
This information is often used by residential purchasers as the basis
for selecting a lamp because they often associate light output with the
wattage ratings of the general service incandescent lamps they
currently use. But, wattage information also is important to know for
safety reasons. Lamp fixtures often are marked with the maximum wattage
lamp the fixture is designed to use. For incandescent lamp fixtures in
particular, use of a lamp with a higher wattage than that marked on the
fixture can result in a safety hazard created by the higher heat output
from the higher wattage lamp. Purchasers, therefore, need wattage
information in addition to lumen output when selecting the appropriate
lamp to meet their requirements.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\2The term ``watt'' (a unit of power) is defined as the power
which in one second gives rise to energy of one joule. NIST Special
Publication 330, at 18. In EPCA, as amended by EPA 92, the term
``lamp wattage'' means ``the total electrical power consumed by a
lamp in watts, after the initial seasoning period referenced in the
appropriate IES standard test procedure and including, for
fluorescent, arc watts plus cathode watts.'' 42 U.S.C.A. 6291(30)(O)
(West Supp. 1993).
\7\3The Light Bulb Rule already requires a wattage disclosure
for incandescent lamps. 16 CFR 409.1(a)(1).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Accordingly, the Commission is requiring disclosure of watts on
packages. In addition, to help purchasers understand the meaning of
watts, the Commission is requiring that the phrase ``energy used''
precede the wattage number and term ``watts.'' The juxtaposition of the
``watts'' and ``energy used'' disclosures, in conjunction with the
``lumens'' and ``light output'' disclosures, discussed in Part
IV.C.1.c.i, below, can help educate purchasers on the relationship
between the amount of light a lamp produces and the amount of energy
used to produce the light. These disclosures, along with the Advisory
Disclosure described in Part IV.C.2.c, below, will enable purchasers to
select the most energy efficient products that meet their lighting
needs. At the same time, the combined disclosures will provide retail
purchasers with the ``watt'' information they may be most accustomed to
using as the basis for their purchasing decisions, and which they may
need to avoid purchasing a lamp product that is inappropriate for the
lamp fixture in which it will be used. See Secs. 305.11(e)(1)(A)(iii)
and 305.11(e)(1)(B) in ``Text of Amendments,'' below.
c. Light output in lumens. The terms ``lumens,'' ``lumen output,''
or ``lumen rating'' refer to a lamp product's light output.74 This
information is designed to permit the purchaser to determine whether a
given lamp will provide sufficient light to meet the purchaser's
requirements and to compare the relative light output of competing lamp
products. Some retail purchasers may generally refer to this concept as
``brightness,'' but this term actually means something different from
light output, according to accepted industry definitions.75 In the
NPR, the Commission proposed requiring that packaging disclose lumens
(whether identified by that term, or another such as ``light output'').
There was agreement among the participants in the proceeding that light
output in lumens should be disclosed.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\4Under EPCA, the term ``lumen output'' means ``total luminous
flux (power) of a lamp in lumens, as measured in accordance with
applicable IES standards as determined by the Secretary [of DOE].''
42 U.S.C.A. 6291(30)(Q) (West Supp. 1993). For incandescent lamps,
the Light Bulb Rule already requires that light output be disclosed
in lumens.
\7\5Brightness is measured in candelas and means the intensity
of the light, whereas light output, which is measured in lumens,
means amount of flow of light.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
i. Emphasis on light output in disclosures. Although light output
is the primary descriptor of whether a specific lamp will provide the
necessary lighting to meet a particular need, it appears that
residential purchasers, at least, often purchase lamps based on the
product's rated wattage.76 For these purchasers, different
wattages are associated with various lighting needs. There are lamp
products with substantially different wattage ratings, however, that
can provide almost the same light output in lumens. Stated another way,
by choosing lamps on the basis of light output, consumers could meet
their lighting needs and use less energy by selecting a lamp of a lower
wattage.77
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\6See Part IV.C.1.b, above.
\7\7For example, a general service incandescent halogen lamp can
provide a greater light output in lumens than a standard general
service incandescent lamp of the same wattage rating. In addition, a
compact fluorescent lamp can provide the same or greater light
output in lumens than a general service incandescent halogen lamp at
a significantly lower wattage rating.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Four comments agreed that a key element in getting consumers to
purchase more energy efficient lamps is to encourage them to shop for
light output in lumens, rather than for energy usage in watts, as they
currently are more accustomed to do.78 Several comments favored
furthering this objective by making the disclosure of light output (in
lumens) as prominent as or more prominent than the wattage disclosure
on current packaging.79 Some comments also suggested that, because
residential consumers are often unfamiliar with the term ``lumen,'' the
disclosure of lumens should be accompanied by a descriptive phrase that
would be more familiar, such as ``light output'' or
``brightness.''80 There was, however, information presented at the
Workshop indicating that lumens is not an unfamiliar concept to many
consumers, even though wattage may be a more significant factor in
making purchase decisions.81
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\8Angelo, G-1, 2, (Tr.), 182-183; Osram, G-4, 2; Philips, G-5,
2-3; GE, G-2, 7, (Tr.), 181-182. See Part IV.C.1.b, above.
\7\9Angelo (Tr.), 182-183 (``make lumens more prominent''); GE,
G-2 (Ans.), 1 (``prominent''); Philips, G-5, 1-2 (``at least 50%
that of the wattage''); MO DNR, GG-10, 3 (``more prominently''); WA
SEO, GG-18, 1-2 (``of equal size and prominence''). But see GE (Tr.)
181-182 (the change in prominence should be gradual).
\8\0GE, G-2, (Ans.), 9 (``brightness (lumens)''); Philips, G-5,
2-3 (``light output''); ACEEE, GG-1, 3 (``light output: XX
Lumens''); MO DNR, GG-10, 3 (``brightness (lumens)''). But see OR
DOE, GG-13, 3 (``lumen disclosure should be in lumens, not
``brightness'' or ``light output'').
\8\1According to research conducted by Conway/Milliken &
Associates for GE in July 1992, 55% of all consumers understand the
meaning of lumens, even though they may purchase based on wattage.
GE (Tr.), 109-10. See GE (Supp.), G-9, 1, Ex. A. But see Angelo
(Tr.), 134-35 (disagrees and thinks that most consumers do not know
watts are a measurement of energy as opposed to a measurement of
light, because, up until now, they have purchased on the basis of
watts).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Commission agrees that the labeling rules should assist
purchasers in shopping for lamps on the basis of light output in lumens
rather than watts. Because competing lamp products may provide the same
lumen output at varying wattage ratings, purchasers can reduce their
energy costs for lighting by purchasing lamp products that provide the
lumens they need at the lowest wattage ratings. Current packaging
generally highlights wattage, and purchasers may be accustomed to
selecting lamp products based on wattage instead of lumens (e.g., they
simply replace a burned out 100 watt lamp with a new 100 watt lamp).
It is in the interest of energy efficiency, therefore, to design
labeling information to highlight the importance of light output in
lumens. Accordingly, the Commission is requiring that the lumens
disclosure be identified primarily as one of ``light output,'' and that
this light output disclosure be the first of the three basic
performance disclosures appearing on the primary display panel. In
addition, to remind consumers that wattage is not a measure of light
output, the wattage disclosure will be identified primarily as ``energy
used.''82 See Sec. 305.11(e)(1)(B) of the rule in ``Text of
Amendments,'' below. Coupled with the educational information currently
being provided by manufacturers, utility companies and others in the
marketplace, this increased emphasis in labeling on light output and
clarification of the meaning of wattage should help educate consumers
to save energy costs by purchasing the lowest wattage lamp that
provides the light output they need.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\2The Commission is not specifying type size for these
disclosures because of the huge variety of packaging styles and
sizes, and the need to vary type size according to the package.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
ii. Average initial lumens vs. average mean or average lumens. In
general, the light output in lumens of a given lamp product is greatest
at the beginning of its life (i.e., its ``initial lumens''). Light
output in lumens degrades over the lifetime of the lamp. According to
generally accepted industry standards, the light output for a lamp can
be measured and expressed in terms of average initial lumens (at or
near the beginning of the lamp's life), as average or mean lumens over
the duration of the lamp's real or projected lifetime, or as a range of
lumens. In determining the most appropriate lumen disclosure for each
type of lamp product, the Commission has considered the comments
concerning the effect of degradation on the different lamp types and
the measure of light output in lumens that will give purchasers the
most accurate and uniform information on which they can compare
competing products and make purchase decisions.
There was considerable discussion in the written comments and at
the Workshop about how and at what point or points in a lamp's
operation light output should be measured.83 Some comments
suggested that the required disclosure should be of mean or average
lifetime lumens,84 while others believed that lumens should be
expressed as initial lumens.85
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\3See, e.g., Tr., 66-86.
\8\4Philips (Tr.), 74 (a rating based on a long-term average of
tested lumens that would be rounded); NEPS (Tr.), 67, 72; SCS, GG-
16, 1-3 (details reasons for disclosing ``mean lumen output range,''
including differing lumen depreciation and lumen output values and
differences in lumen output from differences in fixtures,
installations, sensitivity to temperature, and/or ballasts).
\8\5See, e.g., Osram (Tr.), 68; NEMA (Supp.), G-10, 15-16;
Philips (Supp.), G-12, 2; LBL (Supp.), GG-22, 3.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
During the Workshop, representatives of GE and Osram explained in
some detail how lumens are measured under current industry methods. One
of the issues discussed was the extent to which lumens degrade (or
diminish) over the life of a lamp.86 There was general agreement
among most of the Workshop participants that the extent of degradation
of competing general service incandescent lamps and of medium base
compact fluorescent lamps over the average lifetime of a compact
fluorescent lamp (10,000 hours) is substantially the same.87
Accordingly, most Workshop participants concluded that it would be
appropriate for the Commission to require disclosure of average initial
lumens.88 Because it is easier to measure the light output of lamp
products as initial lumens, and a requirement to disclose light output
in initial lumens is consistent with the requirements of the Light Bulb
Rule, the Commission has determined to require disclosure of average
initial lumens on the packages of these products.89 See
Sec. 305.11(e)(1)(A)(iv) in ``Text of Amendments,'' below.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\6See Tr., 66-86.
\8\7Because compact fluorescent lamps have longer lives than
incandescent lamps, this comparison requires that several general
service incandescent lamps be considered for the comparison.
Specifically:
Over the life span of a compact fluorescent product, generally
speaking, after the first hundred hours--and the initial lumens are
measured at one hundred hours burning--the product declines in
output slowly over a life of perhaps 10,000 hours. If you look at
what happens for the equivalent number of incandescent lamps, then
obviously every time you replace an incandescent lamp say after 750
hours, your light output goes up to the initial again, and then
drops off to some lower figure. If you take the difference in the
averages between what you get from that whole bunch of incandescent
lamps and what you get from the single curve with the compact
fluorescent, it is not a very big percentage. It is perhaps around
five percent. That is far less than you will get by differences in
light output from incandescent lamps due to fluctuating voltage.
Osram (Tr.), 80-81.
\8\8See GE (Tr.), 67 (``Whether I would want product A or
product B from a light output or an efficiency standpoint, you'll
still make the same decision.''); Osram (Tr.), 81 (``Our procedures,
both nationally and internationally for rating products at initial
value is something that we can live with as an industry, and
something that we can measure with some consistency, and can be
enforced.''); NEMA (Supp.), G-10, 15-15; LBL (Supp.), GG-22, 3
(``There was considerable discussion at the Workshop on whether
initial lumens, or mean or maintained lumens, should be reported on
lamp labels. LBL concurs with the position that the difference
between the lumen depreciation of general service incandescent lamps
and compact fluorescent lamps is small enough that initial lumens
(per the standard test procedure) are acceptable.''); Philips
(Supp.), G-12, 3. But see MA AG (Supp.), GG-24, 2, fn. 1
(``Manufacturers should disclose if a compact fluorescent lamp or an
energy efficient incandescent lamp's lumen degradation is faster or
further or both than the degradation of a conventional incandescent
lamp.'').
\8\9This requirement is consistent with the Light Bulb Rule. 16
CFR at 409.1(a)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
d. Average lamp life. Lamp life refers to the lamp's average life
or lifetime, measured under laboratory conditions (i.e., average
laboratory life).90 In the NPR, the Commission proposed requiring
disclosure of average life (in hours). During the proceeding, two
issues emerged relating to the proposed requirement to disclose lamp
life: (1) How to determine the life of the product; and (2) whether to
express life in years (based on an average usage period, such as three
hours per day) or hours.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\9\0In EPCA, as amended by EPA 92, the terms ``life'' and
``lifetime'' mean ``length of operating time of a statistically
large group of lamps between first use and failure of 50 percent of
the group in accordance with test procedures described in the IES
Lighting Handbook-Reference Volume.'' 42 U.S.C.A. 6291(30)(P) (West
Supp. 1993).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
i. How to measure lamp life. Laboratory lamp life is determined by
measuring the length of time (in hours) the lamp will operate before
burning out. The IES standard calls for the lamp to be operated
according to an on/off cycling schedule. The life of a lamp is the
number of burning hours to failure. Some industry members, however, to
save time, will use one or two variations of this standard. In one
case, they will use a ``steady burn,'' in which there is no on/off
cycle. In the other case, they will burn the lamp at much higher
voltages than normal and extrapolate the lamp's laboratory life from
the test results.91
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\9\1See Supreme (Tr.), 89-90.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In the discussion of lamp life determination during the Workshop,
the participants agreed that consistency is of considerable
significance for this disclosure. Specifically, it is most important
that the estimated life of competing lamp products be measured in a
manner that yields comparable results. Participants did not, however,
agree that any particular test procedure should be required by the
labeling rules.
As discussed in Part IV.G, below, the Commission has determined at
this time not to require for any of the basic disclosures that any
specific test procedure be used. The Commission, however, is requiring
that manufacturers have a reasonable basis, consisting of competent and
reliable scientific tests, to substantiate these disclosures. To meet
this reasonable basis standard for substantiating light output and
laboratory life disclosures, manufacturers may rely on tests conducted
pursuant to the specific IES test procedure referenced in the Rule.
These test procedures, which comments recognized as appropriate test
standards used by the industry, require on/off cycling. The Commission
concludes that requiring manufacturers to have competent and reliable
scientific tests to substantiate laboratory life claims is sufficient
to ensure that manufacturers determine average laboratory life in a way
that will produce consistent results. See the discussion of
substantiation in Part IV.G, below.
ii. Years vs. hours. The other issue concerning lamp life pertained
to how the lifetime should be expressed. ACEEE originally recommended
that life be expressed in years, but later suggested requiring
disclosure of both years and hours.92 NEMA recommended that the
required disclosure of life be in hours, because a disclosure in years
would involve fractions of less than one year for some lamp products
and assumptions about average hours of use in a year.93 No
commentors were aware of any studies demonstrating average usage
periods for either commercial or residential users for particular types
of lamps or uses. The Light Bulb Rule currently requires that life of
incandescent lamps be disclosed in hours, 16 CFR 409.1(a)(3), and many
manufacturers express lamp life in hours for other lamps. Accordingly,
the Commission has determined to require a simple disclosure of average
laboratory life in hours, rather than years (or both hours and years).
The labeling rules, therefore, require that the average laboratory life
of lamp products be disclosed in hours. See Sec. 305.11(e)(1)(A)(v) in
``Text of Amendments,'' below.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\9\2ACEEE, GG-1, 2, (Supp.), GG-21, 1 (``For example, a label
might read: Lamp Life: 1000 hours (0.9 years at 3 hours per
day).'').
\9\3NEMA (Supp.), G-10, 21 note *.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
e. Quantity of lamps in package. There was no disagreement with the
proposal to require the disclosure on packages of the number of bulbs
contained in the package if there were more than one. This requirement,
therefore, appears in the final labeling rules. See
Sec. 305.11(e)(1)(A)(i) in ``Text of Amendments,'' below.
2. Supplemental Disclosure Options
To supplement the disclosures of wattage, light output and
laboratory life, the Commission proposed in the NPR requiring
disclosure of an efficiency measure of each lamp's performance. The
Commission proposed two alternatives for primary consideration: (1) An
energy efficiency measure such as lumens per watt; and (2) a disclosure
of the estimated energy cost of the lamp based on a specified unit
energy cost and usage period. The NPR also described similar
suggestions made by ACEEE and NEMA. As is further set forth below, the
Commission has concluded that neither a lumens-per-watt disclosure nor
an operating cost disclosure is likely to increase consumers' abilities
to choose the most efficient lamp for their needs. Instead, the
Commission has concluded that the basic information required to be
disclosed should be supplemented by the Advisory Disclosure described
in Part IV.C.2.c, below.
a. Energy index. The Commission explained in the NPR that a lumens-
per-watt disclosure (i.e., the ``Energy Index'' that had been suggested
by NEMA), which would rate the efficiency of a lamp product in
converting electric energy into light output, has the advantage of
simplicity. It pointed out, however, that such a disclosure could
suffer from the drawback identified by ACEEE (i.e., because higher
wattage bulbs often have disproportionately greater light output, they
often will use more energy as well as have a better energy index).
Thus, a lumens-per-watt disclosure alone could lead to lumen and watt
over-purchasing. The Commission inquired whether this drawback could be
avoided by requiring that the Energy Index be accompanied by a
disclosure such as: ``Select the light output you require before
comparing the energy index of different bulbs.''
Most of the comments supported requiring a disclosure of the energy
efficiency of lamp products in the form of lumens per watt and that it
be called an ``energy index.''\94\ One participant compared this to a
miles per gallon disclosure for gasoline, which consumers presumably
understand.\95\ Although consumers could otherwise ascertain the
information from the separately required disclosures of lumens and
watts, the energy index reduces this information to a single
figure.\96\ Several comments favoring this disclosure also recommended
that it be no less than 50% of the size of the light output disclosure
and that it be accompanied by a definition or explanation of its
meaning on the same or another panel.\97\ Two comments recommended that
the Commission require disclosure of a ``range'' of energy indices for
available general service incandescent lamps and compact fluorescent
lamps like those the Commission requires for other products under the
Appliance Labeling Rule, with the performance of the labeled lamp
indicated on the range.\98\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\94\See, e.g., NEMA, G-3, 34-35, (Supp.), G-10, 12; Osram (Tr.),
124, (Supp.), G-11, 2; Philips, G-5, 2, (Supp.), G-12, 1; Panasonic,
G-7, 2; LBL, GG-7, 1; MN DPS, GG-9, 2; OR DOE, GG-13, 2; LRC, GG-15,
2; US EPA, GG-17, 2-3; WA SEO, GG-18, 2; NEPS, GG-11, 3; GE (Tr.),
110, 140, 155, 198, (Supp.), G-9, 1 (GE would prefer that the
Commission require only a disclosure of lumens and watts and no
energy index, but would prefer an energy index disclosure over an
energy cost disclosure).
\95\Osram (Tr.), 124.
\96\See Id. at 125.
\97\NEMA (Supp.), G-10, 12; Osram (Supp.), G-11, 2; Philips
(Supp.), G-12, 1.
\98\LBL (Supp.), GG-22, 3; NIST (Supp.), GG-23, 2-3.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Two comments opposed an energy index as unnecessary or
confusing.\99\ Other comments were concerned with the potential
overbuying problem identified by ACEEE (that the disclosure could
unintentionally force consumers to ``overbuy'' watts and lumens because
higher wattage incandescent lamps tend to have higher energy
indices.)\100\ Three comments, however, agreed with the Commission's
suggestion that the potential problem might be avoided by requiring the
prominent disclosure of wattage next to the energy index disclosure
and/or a definition or explanation that informs purchasers to look for
the lumens they want and then select the highest energy index.\101\ One
comment indicated that the potential overbuying problem was not likely
to be a significant one.\102\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\99\IES, GG-6, 2; SCS, GG-16, 4.
\100\Angelo, G-1, 2; GE, G-2, (Ans.), 1-2; ACEEE, GG-1, 3,
(Supp.), GG-21, 1; MO DNR, GG-10, 2.
\101\LRC, GG-15, 2; WA SEO, GG-18, 2.
\102\OR DOE, GG-13, 2 (may be a problem for some lamps, but not
true in general).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Commission has determined not to require disclosure of a
lumens-per-watt index. Although support was expressed in the rulemaking
proceeding for this proposal, disclosing such an index could result in
consumers purchasing more watts than they need. This overbuying may
occur because a lumens-per-watt index will rise with wattage of
incandescent lamps. Thus, a consumer who buys the lamp with the highest
lumens-per-watt index may select a lamp that has a higher than required
light output and wattage. For example, overbuying may occur if a
consumer selects a 100-watt incandescent lamp with a 17 lumens-per-watt
index as a replacement for a 60-watt incandescent lamp with a 14
lumens-per-watt index or a 75-watt incandescent lamp with a 16 lumens-
per-watt index.
An energy index based on lumens per watt also could confuse
consumers who understand correctly that higher wattage lamps use more
energy. Because a lumens-per-watt index tends to increase with the
wattage of incandescent lamps, these consumers might be led to believe
that lamps with higher energy index numbers generally cost more to
operate. In that event, the much higher energy index numbers that would
appear on the labels of compact fluorescent lamps actually could
mislead some consumers into believing that these lamps were less energy
efficient.
In light of these potential disadvantages, the Commission has
determined not to adopt a lumen-per-watt index as a supplemental
disclosure. The Commission has concluded that the objectives of EPA 92
will be better achieved by supplementing the basic disclosures with the
Advisory Disclosure described in Part IV.C.2.c, below, which informs
consumers how to use the basic disclosures to select the most efficient
lamp for their needs.
b. Energy operating cost. Another proposal for conveying lamp
efficiency information was to require an energy operating cost
disclosure. As described in the NPR, ACEEE suggested requiring
disclosure of estimated annual operating cost.\103\ NEMA suggested
requiring disclosure of both an estimated annual operating cost and a
lumens-per-watt energy index.\104\ Based on these suggestions and other
considerations discussed in the NPR, the Commission proposed requiring
disclosure of estimated monetary cost of energy information, as an
alternative, or in addition to, a lumens-per-watt disclosure of the
lamp's energy efficiency.\105\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\103\58 FR at 60154.
\104\Id. at 60153.
\105\Id. at 61055.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In the NPR, the Commission stated that it might require a
disclosure of the estimated monetary cost of the energy used by a lamp
based on its use for a specified period, such as the lamp's life in
hours or a length of time based on average usage patterns. The
Commission explained that such a disclosure could be based on the
representative average unit cost of electricity, as specified in the
Appliance Labeling Rule, 16 CFR 305.9, or on an assumed unit cost. The
advantage of an operating cost disclosure is that it would reduce to
monetary terms the energy costs of competing lamp products. At the same
time, the Commission stated that it would consider carefully whether
such disclosures, particularly when the costs are prorated over a
period of time that is less than the life of a very energy efficient
bulb, communicate effectively the extent to which a higher initial lamp
cost can be compensated for by lower operating costs over the lamp's
life.\106\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\106\For example, if a monetary cost of operation disclosure
were adopted, one usage period for which disclosures could be
calculated is 750 hours, which is approximately the life of general
service incandescent lamps with the shortest lifetimes. A second
option would be to set a longer period (e.g., 1000 hours). But,
where this period exceeds the average life of the lamp, the cost of
replacement of the lamp might come into play. A third option would
be to use a shorter period, such as one hour, 10 hours, or 100
hours. A shorter period, however, might be too small to illustrate
sufficiently energy cost differences among competing lamps.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Commission pointed out in the NPR that, if it adopted a
monetary cost of operation disclosure, it would have to base the
disclosure on an average or estimated usage pattern (e.g., one year).
The Commission noted, however, that there are no established usage
patterns, and estimated use will vary depending upon the location and
use of the lamp. In addition, the Commission would have to determine
what unit cost of electricity to use. The representative average unit
cost of electricity, as specified in the Appliance Labeling Rule (16
CFR 305.9), changes annually, and thus could result in consumer
confusion if lamps manufactured in different years were available for
sale at the same time. To avoid possible confusion, the Commission
explained that it might require manufacturers to include an explanation
of how the estimated energy cost was determined in immediate proximity
to the monetary cost estimate disclosure.\107\ The Commission
recognized, however, that the additional information could unduly
complicate the label, and therefore not be helpful to purchasers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\107\This would allow purchasers to compare the energy costs of
competing products with different lifetimes based on a time line
that is within the lifetime of all the competing products and is
large enough to illustrate clearly the differences among energy
costs and, therefore, of energy efficiencies. In the alternative,
the Commission explained that it could require that monetary cost of
operation estimates be based upon a constant unit cost of
electricity, such as 10 cents per hour, which although not fully
accurate for all purchasers, would facilitate lamp-to-lamp
comparisons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Because some purchasers may be interested in computing lamp costs
comprehensively, including the initial purchase price, the Commission
proposed requiring information to enable them to make the necessary
calculations to determine the ``estimated total operating cost'' of the
lamp for a standard time period.\108\ But, recognizing that purchasers
would need to make calculations for each lamp they considered, the
Commission stated that it would consider carefully the extent to which
purchasers actually would use the proposed disclosures in making a
purchase decision. As a practical matter, the Commission noted that
purchasers, particularly retail consumers, may disregard, or consider
too complex, any disclosure requiring computations of this sort, and
therefore that such required disclosures may not be useful to
purchasers in their efforts to choose an energy efficient lamp. The NPR
solicited comments on both the annual operating and total operating
cost disclosures proposed by the Commission.\109\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\108\Specifically, the Commission proposed requiring the
following statement:
IMPORTANT: Energy efficient lamps may have a higher purchase
price, but could cost you less overall due to energy savings. The
estimated total operating cost of this lamp for 750 hours of use is:
([Figure A] x the purchase price for one light) + [Figure B]).
Compare this cost to the estimated total operating costs you
calculate for other lamps that provide the same or similar lumens.
The manufacturer would determine and preprint Figure A and Figure B
in this disclosure. The NPR explained how the manufacturer would
calculate these figures and included examples. The Commission
proposed a more detailed disclosure for multiple filament general
service incandescent lamps.
\109\See Questions 3 (``Disclosure of Monetary Cost of
Operation'') and 4 (``Disclosure of Estimated Total Operating
Cost''), 58 FR at 60158-59.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The 17 comments that addressed cost disclosures were evenly
divided. Seven comments recommended that the Commission require some
kind of cost disclosure.\110\ Seven comments opposed such a
requirement.\111\ Two commentors initially supported cost disclosures,
but later recommended against them.\112\ One comment stated that if
cost disclosures were required, the NEMA proposal described in the NPR
for estimated annual operating cost along with an energy index would be
the best.\113\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\110\ACEEE, GG-1, 1-2, (Tr.), 113-114, 149, (Supp.), GG-21, 1;
Gluckstern, GG-3, 1; MN DPS, GG-9, 2; MO DNR, GG-10, 2; NEPS, GG-11,
2-3; LRC, GG-15, 2-3; US EPA, GG-17, 3.
\111\GE, G-2, 7, (Tr.), 170; NEMA, G-3, 35-38, (Tr.), 131, 133,
139. (Supp.), 13, 23-26; OR DOE, GG-13, 3-5; Osram (Tr.), 131,
(Supp.), 3; Philips (Supp.), G-12, 1; Green Seal (Tr.), 159; SCS,
GG-16, 4-5.
\112\Angelo, G-1, 3 (support), (Tr.), 136, 157, 158 (oppose);
LBL, GG-7, 1-2 (support), (Supp.), G-22, 4 (oppose).
\113\WA SEO, GG-18, 2.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Of the comments favoring a cost disclosure, only one recommended
including the purchase price of the lamp in the cost
disclosure.114 Most comments that supported cost disclosures, as
well as some comments in opposition and some additional comments,
opposed requiring disclosure of the ``estimated total operating
cost.''115 The objection most often offered was that manufacturers
have no control over the retail price of the products they manufacture,
which would make it impossible to disclose on packages a meaningful
operating cost figure that includes purchase price.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\14NEPS, GG-11, 2-3. But see NEPS (Tr.), 199 (``I have put it
in my comments as something to be considered, and I am very willing
to back off on [life-cycle cost disclosure].'').
\1\15See Angelo, G-1, 3; Osram, G-4, 2; Philips, G-5, 2;
Panasonic, G-7, 2; ACEEE, GG-1, 1-2, 4 (retail prices vary too much
to require disclosure of estimated total operating cost); MN DPS,
GG-9, 2 (price based cost too complicated unless Commission
prescribes a table with several fixed prices for both bulb types);
MO DNR, GG-10, 2; LRC, GG-15, 2-3 (cost based on purchase price is
practically useless); US EPA, GG-17, 3 (life-cycle cost would be the
best, but it's too complicated; thus, estimated annual operating
cost over a standard time period is the best compromise).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The comments supporting disclosure of estimated annual operating
cost favored the approach because they believe that consumers
understand dollars and that operating cost would provide useful
information.116 Most of these comments recommended using a fixed
unit cost for electricity, rather than the national average cost
figures published annually by DOE, and a fixed usage period.117
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\16See, e.g., ACEEE (Tr.), 149 (``We think you really need a
dollar cost disclosure. People understand dollars.'')
\1\17See, e.g., ACEEE (Supp.), GG-21, 1 (But see ACEEE, GG-1, 1-
2, in which ACEEE advocated earlier the use of a rounded version of
the DOE annual energy cost.); MN DPS, GG-9, 2; MO DNR, GG-10, 2;
LRC, GG-15, 2-3; US EPA, GG-17, 3. Even Philips, which opposed cost
disclosure requirements, agreed that, if they were required, they
should be based on a fixed energy cost. Philips, G-5, 2.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Of those comments opposing required disclosure of operating cost,
most contended that cost disclosures would be difficult to develop and
would make disclosures too complicated, regardless of whether annual or
total costs were used.118 Several comments remarked that cost
disclosures in U.S. dollars would result in crowded labels and consumer
confusion because of the United States' increased trade with Canada and
Mexico under the North American Free Trade Agreement
(``NAFTA'').119
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\18See, e.g., SCS, GG-16, 4-5 (``Given that the most accurate
presentation of operating costs is utility district based (due to
utility rates (affecting operating cost) and rebates (affecting
purchase cost)) rather than national, printing operating costs
directly on the product package is problematic.'')
\1\19IES, GG-6, 2 (``Will labeling requirements necessitate bi-
and tri-language packaging to explain the (U.S. cost)
information?''); Osram (Tr.), 121; (Supp.), G-11, 3; GE, G-2,
(Ans.), 4, (Tr.), 140 (``The result of dollar cost operation on
package would force manufacturers to make country-specific
packaging. Country-specific packaging means that we are less
efficient and we are not as able to meet consumer demands in the
three (national) markets.''), 141 (noting that there could be
special problems with products bound for Canada, which would need
bi-lingual labels and, if cost were required, cost disclosures in
both US and Canadian dollars).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Some comments that opposed mandatory cost disclosures recognized
that manufacturers might want to disclose some cost information
voluntarily in point-of-sale materials.120 Several comments
recommended that the Commission regulate how cost disclosures on
packaging or in point-of-sale materials should be made, if the
manufacturer wishes to make them. Of these, some recommended that the
Commission require manufacturers to disclose the product usage period
and energy cost assumptions upon which their cost claims were
based.121 Other comments suggested that the Commission should
prescribe standardized assumptions for any voluntarily-made operating
cost disclosures.122
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\20Osram (Supp.), G-11, 2; LBL (Supp.), GG-22, 4 (contending
that the information necessary to make informed purchasing decisions
between two lamps of different efficiencies and price takes two
forms: Total operating costs, and total life-cycle costs. ``Since
electricity rates vary considerably by region, hours of lamp usage
vary by consumer, and retail price depends on factors outside the
manufacturers' influence, it is difficult to present this
information on a product label. However, guidelines should be
established by the Commission for presentation of these quantities
in point-of-purchase information to avoid confusing or inaccurate
claims in product advertising.''); SCS, GG-16, 4-5.
\1\21NEMA (Supp.), G-10, 25 note ** (``NEMA believes that the
Commission should not mandate specific assumptions that must be used
in voluntary cost disclosures. Rather, the Commission should require
that manufacturers who choose to make disclosures must disclose
their assumptions about the cost of electricity and annual hours of
lamp use.''); Philips (Supp.), G-12, 1 (``Any such (voluntary
operating cost) disclosures should be based on substantiated test
data and any assumptions (should be) disclosed on the package.'').
\1\22See Angelo (Tr.), 136, 157 (suggesting that the Commission
set a standard to avoid one manufacturer using 10 cents per kWh and
another using 15 cent per kWh), 158; GE (Tr.), 170 (``We do agree
that if cost of operation is going to be optionally claimed on a
package, then it is a good idea to have a standard set of
assumptions.''), 170-72 (cautioning that, unless the required
assumptions are keyed into flexible marketplace standards, there is
a risk of their becoming outdated, which would undermine credibility
and inhibit the main goal: Consumers switching from general service
incandescent lamps to compact fluorescent lamps); Green Seal (Tr.),
159 (``* * * I think it makes sense, therefore, to lay out what the
assumptions are and once that is done, there is a standard.'');
Osram (Supp.), G-11, 2 (supports development of a common set of
criteria for operating cost disclosures on lamp packages where the
manufacturer chooses to display them, and suggests basing
disclosures in meantime on 1100 hours use per year and 10 cents per
kilowatt-hour).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Commission has determined not to require disclosure of
operating cost information for general service incandescent
(nonreflector) lamps and medium base compact fluorescent lamps. The
Commission agrees that fluctuations in retail purchase prices for lamp
products and utility company rebates make it a practical impossibility
for manufacturers to disclose a meaningful total operating cost that
includes purchase price.123 The Commission also agrees that
varying energy rates and consumer usage patterns would make it
necessary to require computation of annual operating cost on the basis
of questionable assumptions.124 This would make it difficult, if
not impossible, to provide current, accurate and meaningful annual
operating cost information for prospective lamp purchasers.125
Because purchasing decisions are likely to be made very quickly for
lamps, which are relatively low-priced items, complicated disclosures
involving operating costs are unlikely to be heeded by purchasers at
the point of sale and may possibly be confusing.126 Therefore, a
required energy operating cost disclosure would not be useful in
helping buyers make purchasing decisions.127
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\23To encourage the use of compact fluorescent lamps, some
utility companies offer significant rebates to their customers for
purchasing them. These offers usually accompany the consumers'
utility bills, and include explanations of why compact fluorescent
lamps can save energy and money.
\1\24Various studies have shown that 1100 operating hours per
year is the average figure for a lamp in a residential setting.
Osram (Tr.), 122. To use this average where the lamp a consumer
actually purchases only has a 750 hour life, however, could be
confusing. GE (Tr.), 155. See notes 106, 108, above.
\1\25Also, because the dollar cost figure on the package will
not relate to what the consumer is paying for the lamp, it is likely
to be confusing to consumers. Tr., 132-33, 138-39.
\1\26See, e.g., NEMA, G-3, 36-37. According to GE, of industry
sales of all incandescent lamps to residential purchasers in 1992,
36% were sold through mass merchants, 31% through food and grocery
outlets, 22% through hardware and home center stores, 7% through
drug stores and 4% through all other outlets. GE (Tr.), 105(4).
Seventy eight percent of all these lamps are purchased by
residential consumers walking themselves through the purchase
decision, without expert assistance. GE (Tr.), 105(5). In addition,
the average residential consumer spends 53 minutes total for all
purchases per stop in grocery or food stores, GE (Tr.), 108, so the
consumer obviously spends little time deciding which lamp to
purchase in these stores.
\1\27In contrast, information disseminated to consumers in other
ways, such as utility company bill inserts, may be more useful.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The labeling rules do not prohibit manufacturers from disclosing
operating cost information, if they choose to do so. The Commission has
determined not to prescribe standardized assumptions for these
disclosures. The final labeling rules, however, require that, if
manufacturers voluntarily choose to make operating cost disclosures on
packaging labels, in catalogs or in point-of-sale printed materials,
they disclose the unit energy cost, usage patterns, purchase price, and
other assumptions upon which the operating cost claims are based. See
Secs. 305.11(e)(3), 305.13(a)(2) and 305.14(d)(2) in ``Text of
Amendments,'' below.
c. Advisory disclosure. As discussed above, the Commission has
determined to require that packaging and catalogs contain an Advisory
Disclosure that advises consumers how to select the most efficient lamp
for their needs. The Advisory Disclosure is:
To save energy costs, find the bulbs with the light output you
need, then choose the one with the lowest watts.
This statement advises consumers how to use the lumen and wattage
disclosures that will be on the packages to make energy efficient
choices. It has the benefits of the explanatory statement that would
have accompanied the Energy Index, without the potential overbuying
drawback of the index number itself. Like the proposed Energy Index, it
may alert consumers to consider lamps, such as halogen incandescent
lamps or compact fluorescent lamps, which have lower wattages but
produce comparable amounts of light output as higher-wattage
incandescent lamps.
3. Additional Disclosures for Multiple Filament Incandescent Lamps
For multiple filament (``three-way'') general service incandescent
lamps (i.e., incandescent lamps with two filaments of different wattage
that can be burned either separately or together, producing three
different light output levels), the Commission proposed requiring that
design voltage, wattage, light output and an efficiency measure be
disclosed for operation at each level. It proposed that the life rating
be based on the life of the first filament that fails. The Commission
solicited comments on whether and how proposed operating cost
disclosures should apply to multiple filament lamps.128
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\28See 58 FR at 60155, and Questions 3 and 4, at 60158-59.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Five comments addressed how to disclose wattage, light output,
laboratory life and the energy index for these lamp products.129
There was general agreement among these comments that the Commission
should require disclosure of watts and lumens for all three settings,
and that the required disclosure of the laboratory life of the lamp
should be determined on the basis of the major filament.130 One
comment recommended requiring use of the average wattage ``as used'' in
calculating an estimated operating cost.131
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\29NEMA, G-3, 45, (Tr.), 206-207, (Supp.), G-10, 14; GE (Tr.),
211; Osram (Supp.), G-11, 3; Philips (Supp.), G-12, 1; OR DOE, GG-
13, 7.
\1\30Id.
\1\31ACEEE, GG-1, 3.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Based on the discussion in Part IV.C.1.a-e, above, the Commission
has determined to require, for multiple filament lamps, the same
disclosures required for a single filament lamp, i.e., energy used (in
terms of wattage), light output (in lumens), laboratory life (in hours)
and the Advisory Disclosure. Consistent with the Light Bulb Rule, the
Commission has determined to require disclosure of wattage and light
output for each light output level of a multiple filament lamp. The
Commission has determined to require disclosure of average laboratory
life on the basis of the filament that fails first, rather than on the
major filament, as suggested by the comments.132 If the secondary
filament routinely fails before the major filament, basing the life
estimate on the major filament would not be helpful to purchasers. For
the reasons explained in Part IV.C.2.b, above, the Commission has
determined not to require energy operating cost information for
multiple filament lamps. See Sec. 305.11(e)(1)(G) in ``Text of
Amendments,'' below.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\32This is consistent with the Light Bulb Rule. 16 CFR 409.1
n. 1.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
4. Additional Disclosures Recommended for Compact Fluorescent Lamps
Several comments recommended requiring disclosures for compact
fluorescent lamps that would be unique to this type of lamp. These
suggestions are discussed below.
a. Equivalence claims. In its proposal described in the NPR, ACEEE
suggested that the relative light output of a compact fluorescent lamp
be measured by comparing it to an incandescent reference lamp, with an
incandescent reference lamp being defined for each common type and
wattage of compact fluorescent lamp.133 Presumably, this would
provide those purchasers who use watts when buying incandescent lamps
with light output information they could use in deciding which compact
fluorescent lamp would provide the most comparable replacement for that
incandescent reference lamp. Responding to this suggestion, some
comments recommended against requiring that the lumens of compact
fluorescent lamps be expressed as a percentage of the light output of
an incandescent reference lamp.134 Others favored such an
approach.135
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\3358 FR at 60154.
\1\34LBL (Supp.), GG-21, 2 (``CFL package information should not
claim equivalent light output based on incandescent wattage'').
\1\35MN DPS, GG-9, 2 (``It would be confusing to express light
output of a lamp as a percent of a reference lamp. Comparison with
reference lamps is an excellent approach, but the comparison should
be simply stated in watts, lumens per watt and lumens. It would be
especially helpful in encouraging the sale of compact fluorescent
lamps to have a comparable light output compact fluorescent lamp as
the reference lamp for incandescent lamps and vice-versa.''); LRC,
GG-15, 2; MA AG (Supp.), GG-24, 2.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Commission believes that the disclosure of wattage, light
output in lumens, and the other factors required by the final labeling
rules, will be sufficient to allow purchasers to compare competing
products when making purchasing decisions, without the necessity of
tying a compact fluorescent lamp to a specific incandescent reference
lamp. Therefore, the Commission has decided not to require disclosure
of an equivalent reference lamp for each compact fluorescent lamp.
Manufacturers may voluntarily choose to make equivalence claims,
however.
b. Base-up/base-down measurement. Most comments that specifically
addressed the light output performance of compact fluorescent lamps
suggested that lumen measurements for these products vary depending on
whether the lamp is tested in a base-up or base-down position.136
For example, there was testimony at the Workshop to the effect that
there could be as much as a 20 to 30 percent variation in light output
between a base-down and a base-up configuration, depending on the lamp
and its installation.137 The comments also state that no test
procedure has yet been developed to measure lumens accurately for
compact fluorescent lamps in a base-down position.138
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\36See, e.g., ACEEE, GG-1, 3, (Tr.), 234, (Supp.), GG-21, 3;
OR DOE, GG-13, 10; LRC, GG-15, 2, (Tr.), 235; US EPA, GG-17, 2;
Osram (Tr.), 233, 242; GE (Tr.), 236; NEMA (Tr.), 272; Philips
(Supp.), G-12, 1; LBL (Supp.), GG-22, 2. Compact fluorescent lamps
normally are tested for light output ratings with the base facing
upward. On the other hand, compact fluorescent lamps used as
replacements for incandescent lamps normally are used with the base
facing downward. This difference in position may result in a
different light output. In addition, the temperature of the
environment surrounding the compact fluorescent lamp also affects
light output. When compact fluorescent lamps are used in enclosed
luminaires with internal temperatures that are elevated above room
temperature, the result may be reduced light output. The same is
true when compact fluorescent lamps are operated outdoors at low
temperatures. Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, Lighting Research
Center, National Lighting Product Information Program, Specifier
Reports: Screwbase Compact Fluorescent Lamp Products (``Rensselaer
Report''), Vol. 1, Issue 6, April 1993, C-3, at 6.
\1\37See, e.g., US EPA, GG-17, 2; Osram (Tr.), 233; LRC (Tr.),
235.
\1\38See ACEEE (Supp.), GG-21, 3; LBL (Supp.), GG-22, 2; OR DOE,
GG-13, 10.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
There was general agreement among these comments that the fact that
lumens will vary between base-up and base-down applications should be
addressed in the disclosure requirements. Most comments also agreed
that, if there were more than a five percent difference between base-up
and base-down lumens, manufacturers should be required to disclose each
separately, disclosing base-down lumens to the best of their
ability.139 The Commission agrees that, to the extent the base-up/
base-down positioning of compact fluorescent lamps affects the light
output of the lamps significantly, those differences in light output
should be disclosed. The Commission finds that a difference of more
than five percent in lumen output is significant, and has determined
that the labeling rules shall require disclosure of light output in
lumens for both base-up and base-down positions when the manufacturer
has reason to believe that the difference between the two disclosures
would be more than five percent. Therefore, if the manufacturer has
reason to believe the light output at a base-down position would be
more than 5% different, the label also must disclose the light output
at the base-down position or, if no test data for the base-down
position exist, that the light output for a base-down position might be
more than 5% less. See Sec. 305.11(e)(1)(E) in ``Text of Amendments,''
below.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\39LRC (Tr.), 235; ACEEE (Tr.), 239, (Supp.), GG-21, 3 (would
prefer that a test procedure for base-down lumens be developed but
supports disclosure based on multiplier in interim); NEMA (Tr.),
272; Philips (Supp.), G-12, 1.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
c. CRI and CCT. Some comments suggested that the Commission require
the disclosure of the color rendering index (``CRI'') and the
correlated color temperature (``CCT'') for compact fluorescent
lamps.140 These two measurements are used by the industry to
describe the color of the light that compact fluorescent lamps produce.
The record on whether these factors should be disclosed is insufficient
for the Commission to prescribe labeling requirements. Although these
are useful disclosures for commercial consumers and for some
knowledgeable residential consumers, they are not necessary for them or
other purchasers to select the most energy efficient lamps to fill
their lighting needs. Additionally, it would be difficult to explain
the meaning and use of these items in concise and simple terms on the
limited space available on lamp packaging. To the extent such
information is important, it is likely that manufacturers, utility
companies and other interested parties voluntarily will provide that
information on packaging or by other means. If they do not and
consumers are dissatisfied with the performance of compact fluorescent
lamps, they will not make repeat purchases of compact fluorescent
lamps. Consequently, the Commission is not requiring the disclosure of
CRI or CCT for compact fluorescent lamps.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\40WA SEO, GG-18, 3; MA AG, GG-8, 3, (Supp.), GG-24, 1-2; OR
DOE, GG-13, 5-7, 7-8; ORSU, GG-14, 2-3. EPCA defines these two terms
as follows:
The term ``color rendering index'' or ``CRI'' means the measure
of the degree of color shift objects undergo when illuminated by a
light source as compared with the color of those same objects when
illuminated by a reference source of comparable color temperature.
42 U.S.C.A. 6291(30)(J) (West Supp. 1993).
The term ``correlated color temperature'' means the absolute
temperature of a blackbody whose chromaticity most nearly resembles
that of the light source. 42 U.S.C.A. 6291(30)(K) (West Supp. 1993).
The NPR proposed including these definitions of CRI and CCT in
the Rule because they are terms that will often be used in
connection with the marketing of fluorescent lamp products and
because DOE may include them in its standards or test procedure
rules.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
d. Operating temperature. OR DOE recommended that the Commission
require disclosure of the effect of operating temperature on compact
fluorescent lamps. OR DOE stated that many fluorescent products do not
start or operate well at very low temperatures, such as in outdoor
lighting in cold temperatures, and do not provide full light output at
very low or very high temperatures.141 The record does not contain
sufficient specific information for the Commission to conclude how
significant and extensive the effects of temperature are on compact
fluorescent lamps in actual practice and to determine what specific
disclosures are needed. Moreover, it appears that manufacturers already
disclose the temperature factor in some instances on compact
fluorescent lamp packages. To keep the required disclosures simple and
concise, therefore, while fulfilling the statutory mandate concerning
the important information the labeling rules should provide, the
Commission has determined not to require disclosures concerning the
operation of compact fluorescent lamps under these operating
conditions.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\41OR DOE, GG-13, 5-6. OR DOE's comment directed this concern
to all fluorescent lamp products. Because general service
fluorescent lamps are purchased overwhelmingly for commercial use,
and most commercial purchasers are more knowledgeable about the
factors affecting performance of those lamp products, the Commission
is addressing this issue primarily as it concerns compact
fluorescent lamps purchased by residential consumers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
e. Noise and interference factors. Several comments suggested
requiring disclosure of warning-type information, such as the
possibility that compact fluorescent lamps will interfere with some
remote control and other electronic devices.142 One comment
recommended requiring the disclosure of power quality and noise
factors.143 Although noise interference warnings appear on
packaging for at least some compact fluorescent lamps, there was
insufficient information presented on the rulemaking record about how
significant these factors are. In light of this, as well as the
practical necessity to limit required disclosures to the most important
information consumers need, the Commission has determined not to
require disclosure of these factors. To the extent manufacturers wish
to disclose information about any of these factors in a truthful and
non-deceptive way, they will be free to do so.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\42MA AG, GG-8, 1-3, (Supp.), GG-24, 1-2; NEPS, GG-11, 3; LBL,
GG-7, 2.
\1\43ORSU, GG-14, 3.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
5. Location and Format of Packaging Disclosures
a. Location. As described in the NPR, NEMA proposed that the
disclosures discussed above for general service incandescent
(nonreflector) lamps and medium base compact fluorescent lamps appear
on at least one panel of the outer sleeve of lamp packages. NEMA
suggested that the Commission specify both type size and relative size
specifications for the disclosures, and that the Commission require
that the supplemental disclosures NEMA proposed (the energy index and
estimated annual operating cost) be disclosed in a square at least one
inch by one inch.144
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\4458 FR at 60153-54.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
ACEEE's suggestions, as described in the NPR, did not contain
specific format recommendations. ACEEE suggested, however, that the
Commission specify label content and size, while allowing manufacturers
flexibility to design their own customized labels within the specified
parameters.145
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\45Id. at 60154.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Commission did not propose specific formats in the NPR for the
size or location of the disclosures under consideration. The Commission
stated, however, that it would consider requiring that the principal
disclosures be featured on the front panel of a package label, perhaps
within a graphic box, while permitting other disclosures to be placed
elsewhere.146
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\46Id. at 60156.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Accordingly, the Commission has determined to require that the
basic disclosures147 and the Advisory Disclosure be made on the
principal display panel of packages for these two types of lamps. The
comments that addressed where these disclosures should be made agreed
that key disclosures should be on the front panel, or on ``at least one
panel.''148 The Commission has determined that it is unnecessary
to prescribe exact specifications for all aspects of the required
disclosures. But, to ensure prominent display of the light output
figure as well as the word, ``lumens,'' the Commission is specifying
format requirements for these and the other performance
disclosures.149 See Secs. 305.11(e)(1)(A) and 305.11(e)(1)(B) in
``Text of Amendments,'' below.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\47The basic disclosures are: design voltage (if other than
120), energy used (expressed in watts), light output (expressed in
lumens), life (expressed in hours), and number of bulbs in package
(if more than one).
\1\48See, e.g., OR DOE, GG-13, Enclosure (showing proposed
disclosures for front and back package panels); Osram (Supp.), G-11,
1 (disclosures should be made on the main panel); Philips (Supp.),
G-12, 1 (disclosures should be on at least one panel of the lamp
package); NEMA, G-3, 39, (Supp.), G-10, 10 (the main disclosures
should be on at least one panel of the package). Although its
comment was directed at the disclosure of an energy efficiency
range, NIST's remarks on disclosure location are pertinent:
The side of the package is not in a prominent display situation
since the customer must remove the package in order to examine the
sidebar information. That is probably too late in the decision
process for many purchasers. It would seem to be more advantageous
to show such information on the front of the package. Then the buyer
could more readily determine that there is another option before
removing from the shelf. As GE noted, the crowded display areas can
become confusing, if not overwhelming, for a wise choice to be made
from the many offerings displayed. Therefore, it seems to be even
more important to get the information displayed up front.
NIST (Supp.), GG-23, 2.
\1\49See NEMA, G-3, 6 (package design plays an important part in
the sale of lamps, package has limited space, specific words and
formats matter greatly).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
b. Type size, pominence, and graphic enclosures. Many comments
stressed the importance of making the light output disclosure with
prominence that is equal or similar to the energy used (wattage)
disclosure. These comments agreed that, to encourage consumers to shop
for lamps based on efficiency, the disclosure requirements should
direct consumers' attention to light output in lumens. To accomplish
this, the comments generally recommended that the lumens number be
disclosed in a size that is at least 50% as large as the wattage number
and that it be disclosed with prominence equal to the disclosure of
watts.150
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\50See, e.g., Angelo (Tr.), 156; GE, G-2, 7, (Ans.), 9. (Tr.),
179 (does not believe that lumens should be larger than watts on the
package); NEMA, G-3, 39 (wherever wattage is displayed, light output
must be disclosed in close proximity, in type that is at least 50
percent the size of the wattage figure); 42 (Commission should
consider requiring all disclosures of wattage be accompanied by a
reference to light output of equal size and prominence), (Supp.), G-
10, 12 (disclosure of light output in lumens should be at least the
same size and no less prominent that the disclosure of wattage);
Philips, G-5, 2 (the words Light Output should appear in close
proximity to the wattage, in print at least 50% that of the
wattage); MO DNR, GG-10, 3 (brightness (lumens), yearly energy
costs, and lamp life should be more prominent than other required
information such as watts, volts, and size); WA SEO, GG-18, 1-2 (to
begin steering consumers to lumens, lumens disclosure should be
larger in comparison to watts than is presently required; it should
perhaps be of equal size and prominence); Osram (Supp.), G-11, 1
(light output disclosure should be no smaller than the wattage
disclosure); ACEEE (Supp.), GG-21, 1 (agrees with the proposal
forwarded by Angelo that the lamp package have both lumens and watts
printed in equal size).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Commission agrees that the requirements should direct consumers
to the lumen disclosure, and facilitate consumers' understanding of the
meaning of the various terms. In the Commission's experience, this will
be facilitated by using simple, understandable language and putting the
most important information first. Accordingly, the amended rule
specifies that the required disclosures appear in the following order:
(1) The term ``light output'' followed by the lumens figure, and,
in close proximity to either of these, the term ``lumens;''
(2) The term ``energy used'' followed by the wattage figure, and,
in close proximity to either of these, the word ``watts;'' and
(3) The term ``life'' followed by the life in hours figure and, in
close proximity to either of these, the word ``hours.''
In addition, the disclosures must conform to the following type
size requirements:
(1) The three numerical figures must be of equal size;
(2) The terms ``light output,'' ``energy used'' and ``life'' must
be of equal size; and,
(3) The terms ``lumens,'' ``watts,'' and ``hours,'' must be of
equal size but only approximately 50% of the size of the terms ``light
output,'' ``energy used,'' and ``life,'' while still clear and
conspicuous.
See Sec. 305.11(e)(1)(B) and appendix K in ``Text of Amendments,''
below.
The rules require that lamp packages contain an Advisory Disclosure
to educate purchasers how to select the most efficient lamp that meets
their needs. The required Advisory Disclosure is:
To save energy costs, find the bulbs with the light output you
need, then choose the one with the lowest watts.
This statement must appear on the primary display panel of the lamp
package, along with the required disclosures of lumens, watts and life.
The Commission is not specifying the type size or style of this
reference, but it must be clearly and conspicuously displayed. See
Sec. 305.11(e)(1)(F) in ``Text of Amendments,'' below.
6. Disclosures in Catalogs
In the NPR, the Commission proposed that required information be
disclosed both on packages and in catalogs from which the lamp products
may be purchased.151 EPCA authorizes the Commission to require
that information required on labels be contained in catalogs. 42 U.S.C.
4296(a) (1988). For consumers who purchase lamps through catalogs for
either residential or commercial use, the catalog serves the same
informational function as a package does for those who purchase the
product off a store shelf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\5158 FR at 60154-56.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Most of those who commented on this issue generally supported the
Commission's proposal. NEMA originally recommended against the
Commission's proposal, arguing that the disclosures that NEMA had
proposed were uniquely suited to the size and space constraints of
packages, and did not necessarily translate well to disclosures in
catalogs.152 In its final comment, however, NEMA recommended
requiring disclosure of all required information in catalogs, except
lumens per watt and number of bulbs in the package.153 OR DOE and
WA SEO recommended that all required disclosures be required in
ordering catalogs.154 Home Depot recommended that the Commission
clearly define ``catalog'' to differentiate between manufacturers'
catalogs and retailers' advertising catalogs or circulars from which
lamps can be ordered.155
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\52NEMA, G-3, 46-47.
\1\53NEMA (Supp.), G-10, 14.
\1\54OR DOE, GG-13, 9 (labeling disclosures for all products
should also be required in catalogs from which these products are
sold, whether at retail or wholesale; where a labeling requirement
applies to entire categories of products in the catalog, the
disclosure could be made once, prominently, at the very least on
each page); WA SEO, GG-18, 4.
\1\55Home Depot, GG-5, 2.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Commission has concluded that the required disclosures are
important to both commercial and residential purchasers of these two
types of lamps, whether they are purchasing the lamps in a store or
through a catalog. The Commission has determined, therefore, to require
that all disclosures that Sec. 305.11(e) requires on packaging be made
clearly and conspicuously in catalogs from which the lamps can be
ordered, with the exception of the number of lamps in a package. The
Commission is not requiring this last disclosure in catalogs because
catalogs often offer lamps packaged in different ways. In some cases,
lamps are offered in cartons containing smaller packages of several
bulbs apiece. In others, lamps are offered in bulk quantities and the
lamps are not shipped in retail-store-type packages. In both cases, the
catalogs clearly disclose price and quantity with respect to the lamps
described on their pages. In contrast, in some instances at point of
sale, without actually opening a package, it is not clear how many
lamps are inside.
For catalogs not distributed to consumers for making purchases for
personal use or consumption by individuals, the disclosures need not
comply with the format provisions of Sec. 305.11(e)(1)(B), but must
only be disclosed clearly and conspicuously. The Commission also agrees
with OR DOE's recommendation that, in cases in which the same
disclosure applies to entire categories of products in the catalog, it
is only necessary for the required disclosure to be made once on each
page on which such products appear. Accordingly, the labeling rules
allow this accommodation. See Sec. 305.14(d)(1) in ``Text of
Amendments,'' below. The Rule also requires that, if manufacturers make
operating cost claims in catalogs, they disclose, clearly and
conspicuously, the assumptions (unit cost of electricity, usage period,
purchase price, etc.) that were used. See Sec. 305.14(d)(2) in ``Text
of Amendments,'' below.
7. Disclosures in Point-of-Sale Printed Materials
In the NPR, ACEEE suggested that the required disclosures for
residential purchasers be disclosed on point-of-sale materials as well
as on packages.156 The Commission proposed that, as one option for
disclosures for lamps sold in bulk without individual packages,
manufacturers be required to include the prescribed information in
written materials in shipping cartons and retailers be required to
disclose it at point of sale.157 This proposal was based on EPCA,
which authorizes the Commission to require disclosure, in written
materials displayed or distributed at point of sale, of any information
required on labels. 42 U.S.C. 6294(c)(4) (1988). In the ``Questions for
Comment'' section of the NPR, the Commission solicited comment on the
appropriateness of point-of-sale requirements.158
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\5658 FR at 60154.
\1\57Id. at 60155.
\1\58Id. at 60159.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The comments were divided on whether the Commission should require
disclosures in point-of-sale materials for general service incandescent
lamps and compact fluorescent lamps. ACEEE consistently recommended
that the Commission require disclosure of annual operating and life-
cycle cost information in point-of-sale materials.159 Although
initially neutral on this point, NEMA ultimately opposed mandatory
disclosures at point of sale in favor of a requirement that
manufacturers be required to disclose only the assumptions upon which
any voluntary point-of-sale disclosures are based.160 GE stated
that, if the Commission wished to provide additional information
explaining the meaning and use of the lumens-per-watt energy index
disclosure, the method most suited for such disclosures is in point-of-
sale materials.161 LBL suggested that the Commission either
prescribe the assumptions upon which operating cost disclosures are
based (such as cost of electricity and hours of use) or, at least,
require that manufacturers disclose whatever assumptions they use in
point-of-sale materials.162 Osram supported the disclosure of
operating costs only at point of sale and recommended that the
Commission prescribe specific cost and use assumptions for those
disclosures.163 Home Depot and SCS recommended that the Commission
issue no requirements relating to point-of-sale disclosures, but that
it allow such disclosures voluntarily.164
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\59ACEEE, GG-1, 3-4, (Tr.), 169, 188, 201, (Supp.), GG-21, 1.
ACEEE recommended charts disclosing several lumens-per-watt
efficiencies cross-referenced to various operating costs based on
different unit costs for electricity. LBL appeared to support this
approach, but recommended disclosing different wattages in place of
lumens per watt. LRC (Tr.), 188-189.
\1\60Initial neutrality: NEMA, G-3, 40-42, 47. Later opposition:
NEMA (Tr.), 190-192, (Supp.), G-10, 14, 26.
\1\61GE (Ans.), G-2, 1.
\1\62LBL (Supp.), GG-22, 1, 4.
\1\63Osram (Supp.), G-11, 2.
\1\64Home Depot, GG-5, 2 (Tr.), 196.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Commission has determined not to mandate particular disclosures
at the point of sale (other than the disclosures on packaging). The
Commission's requirements for disclosures on packages and in catalogs
will provide purchasers of general service incandescent lamps and
compact fluorescent lamps with information sufficient to enable them to
select the most energy efficient lamps to fill their lighting needs.
Several comments suggested that the Commission also require
disclosure of energy cost information, or at least specify the bases
(i.e., the unit energy cost and usage patterns) on which any
voluntarily made energy cost claims are calculated. The Commission
declines to do so, for the same reasons the Commission determined not
to require disclosure of energy cost information on packaging or to
prescribe the assumptions on which voluntary energy cost information is
provided. The Commission has concluded, however, that it is important
that consumers be made aware of the assumptions on which any energy
cost claims on packaging or in point-of-sale written materials are
based. Therefore, the final labeling rules require that the assumptions
(unit cost of electricity, purchase price, hours of use, patterns of
use, etc.) on which any voluntary claims about energy operating cost
are made be clearly and conspicuously disclosed in connection with such
claims on packaging or in point-of-sale written materials.165 See
Sec. 305.11(a)(2) in ``Text of Amendments,'' below.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\65See Part IV.C.2.b, above.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
D. Disclosures for General Service Incandesc
This text is long and has been trimmed here. Open the source document for the complete record.
This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.